Evaluating Effectiveness of Fu’s Subcutaneous Needling for the Pain Nature and Quality of Life in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Study Protocol of Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common clinical disease. Knee pain is the major symptom of knee OA and the primary reason why patients seek treatment. Fu's subcutaneous needling (FSN) has been used to treat knee OA for more than 20 years. However, the establishment of treatment methods and rigorous evaluation of FSN's efficacy are still lacking. A randomized single-blind clinical trial will be conducted to evaluate whether FSN treatment can immediately alleviate pain due to knee OA surrounding the patella and the curative effective of 1-week and 2-week treatments. In addition, the feasibility and initial effect of FSN treatment for patients with knee OA will be discussed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with confirmed knee OA, as diagnosed by doctors using X-ray films or from clinical symptoms, who are over 50 years old will be participants recruited. They will be randomly assigned either FSN treatment or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation treatment. In addition, their pressure pain threshold, muscle tone of lower leg muscle, and physical ability will be measured. Participants will be asked to complete the questionnaires of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Lequesne' index as the measurements for quality of life. RESULTS: The findings of this study will reveal whether FSN or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is clinically efficacious for treating pain due to knee OA, with respect to muscle stiffness, gait, dynamic balance, the pressure pain threshold, and quality of life before and after treatment. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is approved by the Research Ethics Committee of China Medical University & Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan (CMUH107-REC3-027) and registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System (registration number NCT04356651).
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 | 0.096 | 0.058 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".