Effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis, and is a major cause of disability and chronic pain in adults. However, there is very limited evidence in the scientific literature to support the effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in human knee osteoarthritis. This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy of ESWT treatment with sham-ESWT on pain, walking speed, physical function, and adverse effects in knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: This study will be performed and reported in accordance with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology checklist. We reviewed patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis at our academic center from 2016 to 2017. This retrospective cohort study was approved by the institutional review board in Ruijin Hospital. The primary outcome measure was pain on movement measured by a 100-cm visual analog scale. The secondary outcome measures included the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index, range of motion, and adverse effects. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 20.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY). A P-value of <.05 was defined as statistical significance. RESULTS: The hypothesis was that ESWT would be an effective treatment for improving pain and physical function in knee osteoarthritis to control symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5801).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".