MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308440591 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.979207

Effect of Wu Qin Xi exercises on pain and function in people with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4308440591 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiale Guo, Caiju Peng, Ziyan Hu, Liangliang Guo, Ru Dai, Yehai Li

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiofield Effects and Biophysics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMeta-analysisPhysical therapyMedicineKnee painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background As a chronic disease that affects the whole world, there is no definite treatment for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Wu Qin Xi (WQX) is still in preliminary exploration as a traditional Chinese exercise in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of previous studies and to investigate the efficacy of the WQX exercises on pain and function in patients with KOA. Methods We searched six databases (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, CQVIP, and CNKI) for articles on WQX for KOA up to May 10, 2022. Literature search, study selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation were performed by two independent authors. In terms of statistical results, we presented mean differences (MD), 95% CI, and I 2 to show heterogeneity, and, based on that, we chose either a random effects model or a fixed effects model. Results Seven studies were selected for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The WQX intervention group showed statistical differences for both the total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score and its various bylaws, the Visual Analogue Score (VAS), and the presence of general functional exercise in the control group. We also demonstrated the clinically meaningful efficacy of WQX treatment by calculating minimum clinical importance difference (MCID) values that met the MCID values on the WOMAC score. A sensitivity analysis was also performed in this study by subgroup analysis for greater heterogeneity, and it was inferred that the difference in follow-up time was a likely source of heterogeneity. Conclusion Despite some limitations, the current study showed a definite effect of WQX in improving pain symptoms and joint function in patients with KOA. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier: CRD42022332209.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.037
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicBiofield Effects and BiophysicsFrench-language works237,207