The effect of combined hydrolyzed type 2 collagen, methylsulfonylmethane, glucosamine sulfate and chondroitin sulfate supplementation on knee osteoarthritis symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the combined hydrolyzed type 2 collagen, methylsulfonylmethane (MSM), glucosamine sulfate (GS), and chondroitin sulfate (CS) supplement on knee pain intensity in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Patients and methods: This multicenter, observational, noninterventional study included 98 patients (78 females, 20 males; mean age: 52.8±6.5 years; range, 40 to 64 years) who had Grade 1-3 knee OA between May 2022 and November 2022. The patients were prescribed the combination of hydrolyzed type 2 collagen, MSM, GS, and CS as a supplement for knee OA. The sachet form of the combined supplement containing 1250 mg hydrolyzed type 2 collagen, 750 mg MSM, 750 mg GS, and 400 mg CS was used once daily for two consecutive months. Patients were evaluated according to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Visual Analog Scale (VAS)-pain, and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Patients were scheduled to visit for follow-up four weeks (Visit 2) and eight weeks (Visit 3) after Visit 1 (baseline; day 0 of the study). Results: For the VAS-pain, WOMAC, WOMAC-subscale, and HAQ scores, the differences in improvement between the three visits were significant (p<0.001 for all). The patient compliance with the supplement was a median of 96.77%, both for Visit 2 and Visit 3. Conclusion: The combination of hydrolyzed type 2 collagen, MSM, GS, and CS for eight weeks in knee OA was considered an effective and safe nutritional supplement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".