MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386483644 · doi:10.1016/j.jphys.2023.08.014

Face-to-face and telerehabilitation delivery of circuit training have similar benefits and acceptability in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomised trial

2023· article· en· W4386483644 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of physiotherapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineTelerehabilitationOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRandomized controlled trialAlternative medicineTelemedicineSurgeryHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QUESTION: Is periodised circuit training delivered via a telerehabilitation model of care as effective as the same training applied face-to-face for improving pain intensity, physical function, muscle strength, pain catastrophising, body composition, intermuscular adipose tissue and muscle architecture in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA)? DESIGN: Randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessors and intention-to-treat analysis. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred adults aged ≥ 40 years with knee OA and pain for ≥ 3 months, with current pain ≥ 40 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). INTERVENTION: The experimental group received 14 weeks of circuit training delivered via telerehabilitation using video recordings, followed by periodic phone calls in order to motivate and instruct participants. The control group received the same circuit training program in a face-to-face format. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were pain VAS and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical function subscale, measured at 14 weeks. Secondary outcomes included objective physical function, strength, pain catastrophising and morphological measures (muscle architecture and thigh and body composition). Outcomes were measured at 14 and 26 weeks. RESULTS: Periodised circuit training delivered via telerehabilitation had equivalent effects to face-to-face delivery for pain intensity, physical function, muscle strength, pain catastrophising, thigh composition, intermuscular adipose tissue and muscle architecture. Whole body composition did not change appreciably in either group. Adherence to the training was excellent and participants in each group reported good perceptions of their randomised intervention. CONCLUSION: A periodised circuit training protocol can be delivered to people with knee OA in their own homes, using available technology while maintaining high levels of acceptability. More importantly, telerehabilitation appears to cause non-inferior physical and functional outcomes to face-to-face rehabilitation programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: RBR-662hn2.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.250 · 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