MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229453250 · doi:10.1177/02692155221097035

Effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2022· review· en· W4229453250 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haoqian Chen, Zheng Wang, Xinan Zhang, Mingli Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Rehabilitation · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisConfidence intervalMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleStrictly standardized mean differencePhysical therapyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To systemically review the effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) on pain relief and functional recovery in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Data sources PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were used from inception to 18 March 2022. Review Methods Meta-analysis was performed to evaluate pain and function recovery between control and LIPUS groups. Standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated, and data were combined using the fixed or random-effect model. Results Thirteen studies involving 807 patients with KOA were included. Patients’ outcomes treated by LIPUS were improved significantly, including Visual analog scale (VAS) score (MD = −0.95, 95% CI: −1.43 to −0.48, P < 0.001), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) score (MD = −4.35, 95% CI: −8.30 to −0.40, P = 0.0309), Lysholm score (SMD = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.29 to 1.90, P < 0.001), Lequesne index (MD = −1.33, 95% CI: −1.69 to −0.96, P < 0.001), Range of motion (ROM) (MD = 2.43, 95% CI: 0.39 to 4.46, P = 0.0197) and 50 meter walking time (SMD = 1.48, 95% CI: 0.46 to 2.49, P = 0.0044). Subgroup analyses showed monotherapy of LIPUS produced a better effect on reducing VAS score ( P = 0.0213), and the shorter therapeutic period (≤4 weeks) produced a more significant effect on raising the WOMAC score ( P = 0.0083). Conclusion LIPUS was beneficial for pain relief and functional knee recovery and maybe as an alternative therapy in KOA rehabilitation.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.028
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical RehabilitationSame topicUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207