MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388720638 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.4794

Identifying clinically relevant subgroups of patients with knee pain flare-ups for ibuprofen treatment

2023· article· en· W4388720638 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Upasna Sharma, J. Runhaar, P.K. Bos, Desirée M. J. Dorleijn, Marijn Vis, Patrick Bindels, Sita Bierma‐Zeinstra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyContext (archaeology)WOMACPopulationRandomized controlled trialKnee painInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Symptom flare-ups in knee osteoarthritis (OA) are associated with progression of OA, through worsening of synovitis. The randomised controlled trial (RCT) ‘Flaring Arthralgia Relief Evaluation in episodic flaring knee pain’ (FLARE) has shown no clinical benefit of a higher dose non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) over a lower dose, among individuals with a flare-up of knee pain. Objective To identify potential subgroups of patients with a knee pain flare-up who benefit from a high dose NSAIDs treatment. Study Design and Analysis This is a secondary explorative data analysis of a previous performed RCT (FLARE). A multilevel regression analysis was performed to estimate the magnitude of the effect of ibuprofen treatment in the different subgroups and to assess interaction effects. Setting/Dataset The FLARE study was conducted at 27 primary care centers, located in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. From this dataset we selected patients treated with a total daily dose of 1200mg or 2400mg for 5 days, with a value of pain severity on the numerical rating scale (NRS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at least at baseline and end of treatment. Population Studied Adults with a history of ≥1 knee pain flare episodes in the previous year (with or without treatment) and attending a baseline evaluation within 24 hours after experiencing a new episode (defined as pain severity ≥5 on a 0–10 NRS). Intervention Subgroups (severity of morning stiffness, swelling, and pain) have been defined based on literature and clinical expertise. Outcome Measures The primary outcome was the difference in pain severity after full treatment. Difference in WOMAC pain subscale after 5 days and in pain severity after 3 days were secondary outcomes. Results The cohort (n=308) existed of a population with a mean age of 52.4±12.9 (SD) years and 41% females. No significant interaction was found between the predefined subgroups and the treatment effect on pain severity after day 5 (p-values ≥0.28) or on the secondary outcomes (all p-values ≥0.17). Given the potential lack of power, the absolute and adjusted mean differences between treatment arms were compared for each subgroup; none of the differences reached clinical significance. Conclusion Ibuprofen 2400mg had no significant or clinical beneficial effect compared to 1200mg among the predefined subgroups of patients with indications for knee joint inflammation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effectsFrench-language works237,207