MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183212365 · doi:10.18176/archmeddeporte.00039

Experimental pilot study after surgery on a food supplement for athletes to protect articular knee cartilage. A functional and biochemical study

2021· article· en· W3183212365 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Alfaro-Adrián, M Araña Ciordia, M Barajas Vélez

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivos de Medicina del Deporte · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboWOMACOsteoarthritisVisual analogue scaleChondroitin sulfateQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyPlacebo-controlled studyKnee painSurgeryDouble blindPathologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This double-blind experimental study evaluates the efficacy of chondroprotective supplementation (Carticure Plus®, 5000 mg Collagen – Bioactive Peptides, 1500 mg Glucosamine Hydrochloride, 1200 mg Chondroitin Sulfate, 1.1 mg Copper, 80 mg Vitamin C, 2 mg Manganese) in patients with meniscal and ligament pathology who have required arthroscopic surgery. 12 patients with ligamentous injury and 12 patients with meniscopathy were selected, who underwent the measurement of different inflammatory markers using ELISA, collagen 2A and hyaluronic acid, in addition to evaluating pain as well as functionality and quality of life through VAS (Visual Analogue Scale), WOMAC (Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) and KOOS (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score). Statistically significant differences of clinical improvement were observed in favor of Carticure Plus®, with an improvement in the functional capacity of the WOMAC scale, 76% Carticure Plus® vs 53% placebo, for all patients and with a clear improvement in the first month in meniscal injury, in improvement of the activities of daily life (KOOS), Carticure Plus® 31% vs placebo -1%, sports activity, (Carticure Plus® 41% vs placebo 13,2%) and sports and recreational activities (KOOS) (Carticure Plus® 128% vs Placebo 10,4%). On the other hand, in ligamentous injury an improvement in quality of life (KOOS) Carticure Plus® 75% vs Placebo -8,8% and pain (KOOS) Carticure Plus® 49,6% vs Placebo 0,3% was observed in the first month compared to the baseline. In the patient group, pain (KOOS) Carticure Plus® 31,4% vs Placebo 1,3% and activities of daily living (KOOS) Carticure Plus® 43,9% vs Placebo 27,1% in the third month from baseline, are associated with an improvement due to Carticure Plus® when compared to the placebo group. Despite the small sample size, it is remarkable the fact that statistically significant differences have been found, the efficacy of Carticure Plus® could be assumed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivos de Medicina del DeporteSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207