A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of a Hydrolyzed Chicken Collagen Type II Supplement in Alleviating Joint Discomfort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Joint pain and disease affects more than one in four adults in the United States. We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of a hydrolyzed chicken collagen type II (HCII) supplement in reducing joint-related discomfort such as pain and stiffness, and in improving mobility. We enrolled adults aged 40–65 (65.5% were women) who had joint discomfort, but had no co-morbidities, and who were not taking pain medications. The participants were randomized to receive either the HCII supplement (n = 47) or a placebo (n = 43) for eight weeks. At the baseline, and at week 4 and week 8, we administered the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) survey with three additional wrist-related questions and the Visual Analog Scale for assessments of joint-related symptoms. In the WOMAC stiffness and physical activity domains and in the overall WOMAC score, the HCII group had a significant reduction in joint-related discomforts compared with the placebo group. For example, at week 4, the HCII group had a 36.9% reduction in the overall WOMAC score, compared with a 14.3% reduction in the placebo group (p = 0.027). This HCII product is effective in reducing joint pain and stiffness and in improving joint function among otherwise healthy adults.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".