MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399561154 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083440

Tuina on knee pain and functional decline of lower limbs for patients with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis in Shanghai: protocol for a multicentre, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial

2024· article· en· W4399561154 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Ma, Guangxin Guo, Hongyu Yue, Chaoqun Xie, Fangfang Xie, Ziying Chen, Yuanjia Gu, Shuaipan Zhang, Min Fang, Fei Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialCelecoxibAdverse effectClinical trialKnee painAlternative medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is one of the most common osteoarthritis, imposing substantial economic and medical burdens on both individuals and society. In China, Tuina has been selected as a complementary and alternative therapy to relieve knee pain and dysfunction symptoms. However, the current evidence is insufficient to support the efficacy of Tuina therapy in addressing knee pain and improving physical function. The trial aims to compare the effectiveness of Tuina with celecoxib, which is considered as the standard treatment, and to assess its potential as an alternative therapy through changes in outcome measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 360 KOA patients aged between 40 and 70 years and classified as Kellgren and Lawrence grades I-II will be recruited from eight subcentral hospitals. The participants will be randomly assigned to either the treatment group (Tuina, Biw) or the control group (celecoxib, Qd), with both groups undergoing a 4-week intervention phase followed by an 8-week follow-up phase. The primary outcome is the change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale at week 4 compared with baseline. Secondary outcomes including WOMAC stiffness and function subscales, WOMAC total score, 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, Timed Up and Go test, Short Physical Performance Battery, gait analysis parameters and pain medication records will be assessed at weeks 4, 8 and 12. Any adverse events that occur during the trial will be promptly recorded. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine (2023SHL-KY-16-01, 2023SHL-KY-16-02). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300069416.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→