In Reply: Comment on “Effect of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy Versus Intra-articular Injections of Hyaluronic Acid for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I appreciate your interest of our study and are grateful for the comment. We evaluated and compared the effects and outcomes of the extracorporeal shock wave therapy and intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid in patients with knee osteoarthritis using the visual analogue scale, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lequesne index, 40-meter fast-paced walk test, and stair-climb test. The Osteoarthritis Research Society International recommended performance-based tests to assess the physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis Therefore, we conducted a 40-m fast-paced walk test and a stair-climb test to further evaluate the patient's physical function. As is correct in your opinion assessment, the gait analysis evaluation is an objective instrumentation to support the effect of the extracorporeal shock wave therapy and the intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The pathology of the patient's osteoarthritis is commonly degenerative and chronic. We agree that a long-term follow-up study is useful to achieve the management of knee osteoarthritis. We are going to apply it to the following study and will review the results of this follow-up effort.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".