COMPARISON OF INTRA-ARTICULAR PLATELET-RICH PLASMAAND CORTICOSTEROID INJECTIONS FOR PAIN RELIEF AND FUNCTIONAL IMPROVEMENT IN MODERATE KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS IN RURAL INDIAN POPULATIONS – OBSERVATIONAL STUDY.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to compare the efficacy of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus corticosteroid injections in providing pain relief and improving joint function in moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA) among rural Indian patients. Methods: A randomized trial involving 60 patients with moderate knee OAwas conducted. Patients were assigned to receive either PRP(n=30) or corticosteroid (n=30) injections. Pain relief and functional improvement were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at 1, 3, and 6 months post-injection. Results: Corticosteroid injections led to significant pain relief at 1 month, but the effect diminished by 3 months. In contrast, PRP showed slower, more sustained pain and function improvements, with significant benefits at 3 and 6 months. Conclusion: PRP provides longer-lasting pain relief and functional improvement compared to corticosteroids, though corticosteroids offer quicker short-term relief. PRPis less accessible in rural settings but may be preferable for long-term management of knee OA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".