Influence of the outcome of knee osteoarthrosis treatment on patient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The aim of this work is to evaluate the impact of physical procedures on the functional status of patients with gonarthrosis. Material and Methods. 30 patients with knee osteoarthrosis were examined (9 male patients, 21 female patients) in the prospective study. All patients were treated on an outpatient basis in the Special Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases in Novi Sad during 2022. Functional status and quality of life were assessed with use of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index questionnaire and a specific questionnaire for patients with knee osteoarthrosis. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index is a standardized questionnaire used in the assessment of osteoarthrosis of the hip and knee. The specific questionnaire for patients with osteoarthrosis of the knee joint was created by the researchers and contains: general information, a visual-analog pain scale before and after therapy, and a table that monitors the range of motion of the lower extremities during treatment. The results obtained from this kind of research were processed with use of statistical methods. Statistical significance is defined at the probability level of the alternative hypothesis from p?0.05 to p<0.001. Results. Correlation between the treatment outcome and patients? individual characteristics (gender, age, type of work, time diagnosis) is shown. Conclusion. All patients had positive results and improved quality of life, as well as reduced soreness, after two weeks, regardless of their individual characteristics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".