ESRA19-0279 Adding ozone to dextrose and somatropin for intra-articular injection for knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aims Intra-articular dextrose and somatotropin injection, as an alternative therapy has been found beneficial for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Recent studies suggested ozone as a candidate based on analgesic, anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant for these diseases. the aim of this study is investigation of the efficacy of adding ozone to dextrose and somatotropin in patients with knee OA and assess the effects of this modality on pain, joint stiffness and physical activity. Methods Sixty patients who were suffering from knee OA randomly assigned to two groups. In the first group (DS), intra-articular knee injection was 10 ml of 50% dextrose and 4IU somatotropin. In the second group (DSP) a mixture of 10 ml of 50% dextrose, 4IU somatotropin and 10 ml of ozone 25 mcg was injected. Then, during the 3rd, 5th and 16th following week’s participants were examined by Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC Score). Results The mean WOMAC score of patients in the DS group has decreased significantly from 64.9±10.7 at the beginning of the study to 49.2±9.0 at sixteen weeks after that (P<0.001). the DSP group have also experienced a significantly decrease in the mean WOMAC score from 64.2±11.3 at the beginning of the study to 41.4±8.0 at the sixteen weeks after that (P<0.001). the changes of WOMAC score were significantly higher in the DSP group at week 3 and 16 after treatment rather than DS group. Conclusions Adding ozone to dextrose, somatotropin for intra-articular knee injection is more effective for knee osteoarthritis by improving pain, stiffness and functioning of the joint.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".