Feasibility of pain informed movement program for people with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo establish the feasibility of an intervention consisting of neuromuscular exercise, mind-body techniques, and pain neuroscience education (PNE), referred to as Pain Informed Movement in people with knee Osteoarthritis (KOA). This program has the potential to improve our understanding of intrinsic pain modulation and its role in the management of chronic pain.MethodsThis was a single-arm feasibility trial with a nested qualitative component. Primary outcome: complete follow-up. Inclusion criteria: age ≥40 years, KOA clinical diagnosis or meeting KOA NICE criteria, and pain intensity ≥3/10. The program consisted of 8-week in-person and at-home exercise sessions. PNE and mind-body techniques were provided as videos and integrated into the exercise sessions. Participants completed questionnaires and physical assessments including blood draws at baseline and program completion. Secondary feasibility outcomes: acceptability of the intervention, burden, rates of recruitment, compliance and adherence, and adverse events. A priori success criteria were identified. Participants were invited to an online focus group.Results19 participants were enrolled, with a complete follow-up rate of 74% (mean age 63.3 years (SD 10.5), 73% female), indicating modifications were necessary to proceed. All other success criteria were met. The focus groups revealed that the video content pertaining to the mind-body techniques would benefit from on screen demonstrations.ConclusionThe Pain Informed Movement program is deemed feasible, with minor modifications needed to proceed. A pilot two-arm RCT will be conducted to establish the feasibility and explore potential effects of Pain Informed Movement compared to conventional neuromuscular exercise and standard OA education.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".