Effects of combination therapy and infrared radiation on pain, physical function, and quality of life in subjects with knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common degenerative articular disease that causes disability and poor quality of life (QoL) of the individuals. Electrotherapeutic agents such as therapeutic ultrasound (US), interferential current (IFC), and infrared radiation are used in the treatment. It is not clear which of these agents is the best in improving these variables. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the effects of the combined application of US and IFC therapies and infrared radiation on pain, functional activities, and QoL in people with KOA. METHODS: In a randomized controlled study, 60 participants were randomized into two groups, the combination therapy group (CTG) and the infrared radiation group (IRG). Each group received 15-min treatment three times per week for 12 weeks. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess the pain, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) for functional activities and the Short Form Health Survey questionnaire for QoL. RESULTS: improvement in functional activities and QoL compared to the IRG. CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the use of the combination of IFC and US therapies to reduce pain and improve function and QoL for KOA patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".