The effectiveness of rehabilitation measures in the treatment of vertebrogenic arthralgia of the hip joint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of a specially designed physical rehabilitation program to alleviate hip pain and improve function in patients with vertebral arthralgia of the hip was investigated. The rehabilitation program included exercises to strengthen and stretch the muscles of the lower back and exercises for balance. Data from 32 women with unilateral or bilateral hip arthralgia were analyzed. They underwent physical rehabilitation for 3 months. The average age of the patients was 64.5 years. The WOMAC questionnaire (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis Index) with three subscales, the Timed-Up and Go functional test, measurements of walking speed, maximum walking speed and the ability to keep balance were used for the initial assessment of the patient's condition and assessment of the effectiveness of the rehabilitation intervention. Walking speed and maximum walking speed were measured using a stopwatch. The balance was tested using the Berg scale. The data obtained indicate significant positive changes in pain sensation and functional ability according to WOMAC, maximum walking speed, in functional test "Timed-Up and Go" and balance under the influence of rehabilitation intervention. The difference in pain score was 70.75 ± 17.58 mm. The indicator of the functional ability of patients associated with the hip joint during the rehabilitation period changed by 31%, which is a significant change (p ≤ 0.05). There was an increase in the maximum walking speed (on average by 26%) and a decrease in the time for passing the ""Timed-Up and Go" test (on average by 13%) (p <0.05).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".