DİZ OSTEOARTRİTİ TEDAVİSİNDE KOMBİNE FİZİK TEDAVİ VE KAPLICA TEDAVİSİNİN ETKİNLİĞİ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı diz osteoartritili hastalarda hot pack (HP), trankütanöz elektriksel sinir stimülasyonu (TENS) ve kısa dalga diatermi (KDD)’den oluşan fizik tedavi ile kombine kaplıca tedavisinin sadece fizik tedaviye göre ağrı, tutukluk ve fonksiyonel durum üzerine etkisini araştırmaktır.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Diz osteoartriti olan 32 hastanın (Grup 1: fizik tedavi+kaplıca tedavisi alan hastalar) ve 31 hastanın (Grup 2: fizik tedavi alan hastalar ) tedavi öncesi (0.gün) ve tedavi sonrası (10.gün) Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) ağrı, WOMAC tutukluk, WOMAC fonksiyonel durum ve WOMAC toplam skorları değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Tedavi sonrası WOMAC ağrı, WOMAC tutukluk, WOMAC fonksiyonel durum ve WOMAC toplam skorlarında tedavi öncesi değerlere göre her iki grupta da istatistiksel olarak anlamlı gelişme saptandı (p<0.001). Ancak tedavi sonuçları arasında gruplar arası istatistiki olarak anlamlı fark saptanmadı.Sonuç: Diz osteoartritli hastalarda hem HP, TENS ve KDD’den oluşan fizik tedavi hem de fizik tedavi ile kombine kaplıca tedavisi ağrı, tutukluk ve fonksiyonel durum üzerine etkilidir. Ancak iki tedavi grubunun birbirine üstünlüğü saptanmamıştır.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.004 |
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".