Comparison of 10.6 μm Laser Moxibustion with Traditional Moxibustion in Knee Osteoarthritic Therapy: A Randomized Noninferiority Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the noninferiority of 10.6 μm laser moxibustion (LM) to traditional moxibustion (TM) in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods: Ninety-two patients were recruited and randomly placed into one of two groups: 10.6 μm LM or TM in a 1:1 ratio. Each patient received 12 sessions of LM or TM, focusing on the ST-35 and Ashi acupoint. The sessions took place over 4 weeks, three times a week, and were followed up over 8 weeks. The endpoint outcomes were separated into two categories, primary and secondary. The primary endpoint was assessed at the end of the 4-week treatment, using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score. The secondary endpoint was evaluated at the end of the trial and consisted of the WOMAC function and stiffness score, visual analog pain [visual analog scale (VAS)] score, and 15-m walking time test. In addition, safety evaluation was performed throughout the trial. Results: Among the 92 randomized participants, 86 (93.48%) completed the trial; 43 in each group. The WOMAC pain score improved dramatically between the LM and TM groups, with a mean difference of 20.61 [95% confidence interval (CI): −2.28 to 43.50]. Given that the lower boundary of 95% CI was greater than −18.49, noninferiority was established. In addition, both LM and TM significantly decreased the WOMAC (pain, function and stiffness) score, VAS score ( p < 0.05), and the 15-m walking time at the end of the trial. Interestingly, there were not significant differences between LM and TM ( p > 0.05), suggesting that both are equally effective in treating KOA. Finally, among the 92 patients, 17 (18.48%) adverse effects were documented, namely 5 (10.87%) in the LM-treated group and 11 (26.09%) in the TM-treated group. Conclusions: 10.6 μm LM is not inferior to TM in treating KOA. Moreover, both LM and TM dramatically alleviated knee pain and enhanced function of knees. Clinical Trial Registration number: ISRCTN registry trial identifier: 14604492.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".