MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Discussion on <i>Efficacy of intensive acupuncture versus sham acupuncture in knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial</i> published in <i>Arthritis & Rheumatology</i>.

2024· article· en· W4394761932 on OpenAlexaff
Changzhen Gong, Guanhu Yang, Shaobai Wang, Ying Fan, Wei‐Xing Pan, Canhui Li, Hong Su, Xuming Gu, Song‐Ping Han, Zengfu Peng, Yongming Li

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsHumber Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcupunctureMedicineOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyRheumatologyRandomized controlled trialArthritisClinical trialAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

on November 10th, 2021, which demonstrates that three-session per week acupuncture is safe and effective for knee osteoarthritis patients. Experts from home and abroad discussed in depth the study design, acupuncture protocol, and interpretation of the results of the trial, emphasizing the importance of pretrial implementation, acupuncture dosage, reasonable setting of control group and assessing the efficacy of acupuncture, and pointed out that the mechanism of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis still needs further study, and how to promote acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis according to the clinical practice abroad while ensuring the efficacy of acupuncture is worthwhile to explore.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207