Celecoxib vs diclofenac sodium in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is one of the most common chronic muscular diseases in old people. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare celecoxib and diclofenac sodium in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials (CCTs) comparing the use of celecoxib and diclofenac sodium in KOA patients were retrieved from each database from the date of database inception to September 2019. The outcome measurements were the treatment effect, visual analog scale (VAS) score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and complication rate. The pooled data were evaluated with Review Manager 5.3.5. RESULTS: The literature will provide a high-quality analysis of the current evidence supporting celecoxib for KOA based on various comprehensive assessments including the treatment effect, visual analog scale (VAS) score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and complication rate. CONCLUSION: This proposed systematic review will provide up-to-date evidence to assess the effect of celecoxib in the treatment for patients with KOA. RESEARCH REGISTRY REGISTRATION NUMBER:: reviewregistry827.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".