Features of the course and treatment of low back pain in patients with reduced bone mineral density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To investigate the features of the course, clinical manifestations and the effect of symptomatic slow anti-inflammatory drugs (SYSADOA) on the course of the disease in patients with low back pain and low bone mineral density.Materials and methods. The study included 100 patients (60 women and 40 men) aged 34 to 80 years. Patients were divided into 3 groups depending on the index of bone mineral density (BMD). Peculiarities of the course and effectiveness of treatment were assessed using questionnaires VAS, Oswestry, Roland-Morris and McGill. Levels of nonspecific indicators of inflammation (ESR and CRP), cytokines (IL-1, IGF-1, NO), metabolic indicators (lipid, carbohydrate, liver markers) were also studied. “SPSS Statistics” software was used for statistical data processing.Results. The research showed that patients with low bone mineral density had worse performance results on the VAS, Oswestry, McGill and Roland-Morris questionnaires compared to patients with normal BMD. Inflammatory rates such as ESR, CRP, IL-1, NO, IGF-1 were also worse in patients with low bone mineral density. The dynamics of questionnaires and inflammatory markers during treatment was better in patients with normal BMD.Conclusions. Our study showed that patients with low bone mineral density had a more severe course of low back pain: more intense inflammation, worse psycho-emotional state, physical activity and quality of life compared to people with normal BMD. Moreover, patients with low bone mineral density had worse dynamics of SYSADOA treatment.
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".