MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206344263

Clinical and functional outcomes following platelet rich plasma in the management of knee osteoarthritis: A case series in a tertiary care hospital.

2021· article· en· W3206344263 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rahat Zahoor Moton, Maimoona Nawaz, Muhammad Latif, Muhammad Azeem Akhund, Zohaib Khan

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisPlatelet-rich plasmaVisual analogue scaleProspective cohort studyRange of motionPhysical therapyInternal medicineSurgeryPlateletAlternative medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To clinically assess the efficacy of Platelet rich Plasma (PRP) in improving the functional movement in knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: This prospective case series, on 89 patients, was studied in Sindh Rangers Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan from 1st October 2018 to 31st March 2019. The analysis involved all patients aged 30-65 years diagnosed with grade 1, 2 and 3 arthritis. PRP was administered in three doses one month apart, and patients were evaluated for outcome measures after the third month of the third dose of PRP. To measure functional improvement in knee osteoarthritis, the range of motion (ROM), McMaster University Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), Western Ontario, and Visual analogue scale (VAS) were used. RESULTS: PRP was infused into 89 patients, with a mean age of 61.24±8.92 years. The average pre-treatment WOMAC score was 37.0 ±2.9, and it was lowered to 18.8± 5.2 after PRP (p<0.02). The pre-treatment VAS was 8.42 ±0.84, and it was reduced to 4.91±2.12, indicating mild to moderate pain. Our PRP therapy was appreciated by 63 (70.07%) patients, while 17 (19.1%) were only partly satisfied. However, 9 (10.1%) patients were dissatisfied. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this case series showed that the use of PRP injections for treating osteoarthritis (grade 1 to 3) proved to be successful in terms of improving functional outcomes and reducing pain intensity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207