MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972030330 · doi:10.3126/ajms.v10i5.24918

Curcuma longa and Boswellia serrata for Improving Functional Status in Osteoarthritis Patients: From Bench to Bedside Evidences

2019· article· en· W2972030330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rizaldy Taslim Pinzon, Vincent Ongko Wijaya

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Medical Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal Plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACCurcumaOsteoarthritisBoswellia serrataRandomized controlled trialRandomizationCurcuminTraditional medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicinePharmacologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The management of osteoarthritis (OA) represents a real challenge. Curcumin is a highly pleiotropic molecule with an excellent safety profile.Some previous studies showed the extract of Curcuma longa and Boswellia Serrata(CB extract) is a promising potential as therapeutic interventions against OA. Aims and Objective: This study aimed to measure the effectiveness and safety of CB extract for improving functional status in patients with OA. Materials and Methods: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) in OA patients. The treatment used in this trial were CB extract (350 mg of Curcuma longa and 150 mg Boswellia Serrata) and NSAID (400 mg ibuprofen or 50 mg diclofenac sodium). Subjects were randomized to 3 different group (Group 1: CB extract and NSAID; group 2: CB extract; group 3: NSAID). Each subject would be followed up 3 times: baseline (visit I), 2 weeks after baseline (visit II), and 4 weeks after baseline (visit III). The measurement of functional status with WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthitis Index). Results: There were 105 osteoarthritis patients. Seven subjects were lost to follow up and three subjects were excluded from the study due to medication side effect. Ninety-five subjects (group 1: 36; group 2: 29, group 3: 30) remained for complete analysis. Delta (Δ) WOMAC score defined as the result of subtraction between WOMAC score at visit I and WOMAC score at visit III. Group 1 showed the greatest reduction of WOMAC score after 4 weeks of treatment (ΔWOMAC = 12.08 ± 18.6). Group 3 has the least WOMAC score reduction (ΔWOMAC = 6.9 ± 16). There was no statistically different of ΔWOMAC score between groups (p = 0.367). There were no statistically different of the prevalence of AE between groups at the visit II (p: 0.119) and at the visit III (p: 0.767). Conclusion: CB extract is effective and safe for improving functional status in OA 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Medical SciencesSame topicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal PlantsFrench-language works237,207