The effects of Tiszasüly and Kolop mud pack therapy on knee osteoarthritis: a double-blind, randomised, non-inferiority controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this non-inferiority study was to evaluate and compare the effects of Tiszasüly and Kolop mud pack therapy on pain, function and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. In this double-blind, randomised, follow-up study, 60 patients with knee osteoarthritis were treated with either Tiszasüly hot mud pack (group 1) or with Kolop hot mud pack (group 2) on 10 occasions for 2 weeks (10 working days). One hundred millimetre visual analogue scale (VAS) for knee pain, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Lequesne Index for physical function and EuroQoL-5D for quality-of-life measurements were recorded at baseline, at the end of treatment (week 2) and 3 months later (week 12). In both groups, all measured parameters improved significantly from the baseline until the end of treatment and during the follow-up period (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the WOMAC, KOOS, EQ-5D and Lequesne Index at any visits. Knee pain improved in both groups at week 2 and week 12; the only significant difference visible between the groups was at the end of the treatment in favour of the Tiszasüly mud pack group (p = 0.009). Tiszasüly and Kolop mud packs both have a favourable effect on knee pain, physical function and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Our results proved non-inferiority of Tiszasüly mud pack.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".