Mangifera indica L. extract tablets supplementation in patients with knee osteoarthritis pain. A controlled pilot study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Several experimental results and clinical reports using Mangifera indica L extract (MSBE) suggest its potential utility in osteoarthritis (OA) mixed pain. Aims: To examine the possible therapeutic effects and safety of supplementation on osteoarthritis (OA) pain. Methods: Fifty patients with painful knee OA who had undergone a year of conventional treatment that included paracetamol and non-pharmacological therapies were randomly allocated to the experimental group (n = 21), which received a daily dose of 900 mg of extract supplementation or preceding usual treatment and placebo in the same form (n = 17) for a period of 120 days. The primary measure outcome was the change in the average daily pain diary score (ADPS) using the Likert scale. Also, a multidimensional measure of pain, stiffness and functional disability on The Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities (WOMAC) index for knee OA and ultrasonographic chronic signs of synovitis such as effusion and synovial thickness were evaluated. Results: Change from baseline in ADPS of the MSBE supplemented group showed a significant reduction after two weeks that lasted for 120 days with respect to the placebo group. Significant improvements in pain and functional disability WOMAC sub-scores, number of joints with synovial thickness and effusion after MSBE supplementation vs. placebo were observed. Non-adverse effects were reported in the experimental group. Conclusions: These results suggest that MSBE supplementation has a beneficial effect on OA pain and disability.
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 it