MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3217109565 · doi:10.1101/2021.11.20.21266300

Short-Term Effects of Strengthening Exercises of Lower Limb Rehabilitation Protocol on Pain, Stiffness, Physical Function and Body Mass Index among Knee Osteoarthritis Participants Who Were Overweight or Obese: A Clinical Trial

2021· preprint· en· W3217109565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammad Tariq Rafiq, Mohamad Shariff Abdul Hamid, Eliza Hafiz

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyOsteoarthritisWOMACOverweightBody mass indexRehabilitationRandomized controlled trialKnee painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is defined as a progressive disease of the synovial joints and is characterized by wear and tear of cartilage and underlying bone. This study aimed to determine the short-term effects of the lower limb rehabilitation protocol (LLRP) on pain, stiffness, physical function, and body mass index (BMI) among knee OA participants who were overweight or obese. Methodology Single blinded randomized controlled trial of one-month duration was conducted at Rehmatul-Lil-Alameen Postgraduate Institute, Lahore, Pakistan. Fifty overweight or obese participants with knee OA were randomly divided into two groups by a computer-generated number. Participants in the Rehabilitation Protocol Group (RPG) were provided with leaflets explaining the strengthening exercises of the LLRP and instruction of daily care (IDC), while the participants in the Control Group (CG) were provided with leaflets explaining IDC only for a duration of four weeks. The primary outcome measures were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores for pain, stiffness, and physical function. The secondary outcome measures were BMI, exercise adherence, and patients’ satisfaction by the numeric rating scale ranging from 0 to 10. Paired Samples t-test was used to analyze the differences within groups from baseline to post-test evaluations. The analysis of variance 2 × 2 factor was used to analyze the difference of BMI, knee pain, stiffness, and physical function between the groups. Results Participants in the RPG and CG reported a statistically significant reduction in knee pain, and stiffness (p ≤ 0.05) within group. The reduction in the scores of knee pain was higher in participants of the RPG than the CG (p = 0.001). Additionally, participants in the RPG reported greater satisfaction (p = 0.001), higher self-reported exercise adherence (p = 0.010) and coordinator-reported exercise adherence (p = 0.046) compared to the participants in the CG. Conclusion Short-term effects of the LLRP appear to reduce knee pain and stiffness only, but not physical function and BMI. TRIAL REGISTRATION Name: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials Number: IRCT20191221045846N2 Date of registration: June 28, 2020 Registration timing : prospective

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)0.002
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 venuemedRxiv→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→