Effects of a Mediterranean Diet Compared with the Low‐Fat Diet on Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Feeding Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. Knee osteoarthritis is a common global problem, especially in overweight and obese people. It is not clear that weight loss is a factor for pain reduction in these patients or dietary components are important. Herein, we compared the effects of Mediterranean (MD) and low‐fat diet on pain, stiffness, and physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Subjects / Methods . In this randomized feeding trial, 129 patients with knee osteoarthritis were enrolled. Participants were randomly allocated to the MD ( n = 43), low‐fat diet ( n = 43), and control group (regular diet) ( n = 43) for 12 weeks by the blocked randomization method. Total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score and its subscales and anthropometric indices were compared among the groups at the baseline and end of the study. Results . Weight and waist circumference reduction was significantly higher in the MD and low‐fat diet groups compared with the regular group ( p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively), but there was no significant difference between the MD and low‐fat diet groups ( p = 0.2). Pain was significantly decreased in the Mediterranean‐style compared with the low‐fat ( p = 0.04) and regular ( p = 0.002) diet groups. Physical function was significantly improved in the MD compared with the regular diet group ( p = 0.01), but had no significant difference with the low‐fat one. Stiffness had no significant difference among the dietary groups. Conclusions . Pain severity was reduced in the MD group, but no significant change was reported in patients on low‐fat and regular diets. It seems that dietary components in the MD, regardless of weight loss effect, are effective on pain reduction in patients with KOA. The present study was registered in the IRCT under the code of IRCT20200929048876N1 .
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".