Comparison of the Clinical Efficacy of Arthroscopic Surgery and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to explore the clinical efficacy of arthroscopic surgery and extracorporeal shock wave therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The research period was from February 2022 to January 2023. A total of 79 patients with knee osteoarthritis were included and divided into the study group (n = 40) and the control group (n = 39) by lottery method using computer software. The patients in the control group were treated with arthroscopic surgery, and the patients in the study group were treated with extracorporeal shock wave therapy. The Lysholm score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) score, superoxide dismutase (SOD) level, and malondialdehyde (MDA) level were compared between the two groups. After treatment, the Lysholm score of the study group was higher than that of the control group, and the VAS score and WOMAC score were lower than those of the control group (P < 0.05). While the MDA level of the study group was lower than that of the control group, and the SOD level was higher than that of the control group (P < 0.05). Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for patients with knee osteoarthritis can restore joint function, relieve pain, and effectively regulate the level of oxygen free radicals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".