Comparison of the Effects of Different Molecular Weight Hyaluronic Acid Application in Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of different molecular weight (MW) hyaluronic acid (HA) application on pain and functional parameters in knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: This study was designed as retrospectively. Hospital records of the patients who received intraarticular HA injection therapy in our center were screened. The patients were divided into 3 categories according to the MW of the preparates as the follows; Group 1: 0,6-1,2 Milion Da of MW (N=26); Group 2: 1,1- 2,2 Million Da of MW (N=25); and Group 3: 1,7-2,1 Million Da of MW (N=25). All patients were assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) before the treatment and one month after the injection. Results: A total of 76 patients (61 females, 15 males) with a mean age of 62,1 years (minimum-maximum: 50-70 years) were included. VAS and WOMAC scores did improve significantly in all groups (all for p
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".