Determination of efficacy and toxicity of diclofenac microemulsion formulation for musculoskeletal pain: an observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract OBJECTIVE: Musculoskeletal pain is often caused by injury to the bones, muscles, tendons, ligaments or nerves. Symptoms can be localized or generalized. Mild-moderate symptoms are treated with topical/oral over the counter drugs. Microemulsion delivery formulations are thermodynamically stable, have superior bioavailability and better penetration of lipophilic and hydrophilic drug into the dermis. A prospective observational study in patients: 18 years or older, with mild-moderate musculoskeletal pain; with severe pain without adequate pain control; with severe pain could not tolerate oral agents; with renal impairment were invited to try diclofenac 2% in microemulsion foam. They were followed up every 2 weeks for a month. A 50% reduction on a visual analog pain scale is considered success. Adverse events were defined as irritation, gastrointestinal upset/bleed, rectal bleed, and hematemesis. The objective is to determine the efficacy and toxicity of diclofenac 2% in microemulsion foam. RESULTS: Thirteen consecutive patients with musculoskeletal pain consented to participate. Two patients were lost to follow up. Two of the 11 patients reported minimal improvement, while nine patients reported minimum 50% reduction. No adverse effects were reported. Diclofenac 2% in microemulsion foam is effective in the treatment of mild to moderate musculoskeletal pain and well tolerated.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".