MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406298477 · doi:10.12809/ajgg-2024-673-oa

Tele-rehabilitation versus supervised rehabilitation in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a single-blind study

2025· article· en· W4406298477 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manisha Rathi, Vanisha Steven, Zoha Belkar, Megha Bhandare

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Gerontology and Geriatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationOsteoarthritisPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyMedicineSingle blindRandomized controlled trialAlternative medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background.Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee affects daily activities and quality of life among older adults.Tele-rehabilitation minimises barriers of distance, time, and cost.This study aimed to compare the effects of tele-rehabilitation and supervised rehabilitation on balance, physical function, and disability among patients with knee OA.Methods: Patients aged 40 years with grade 2 or 3 knee OA and impaired balance and moderate knee pain were recruited from Dr DY Patil College of Physiotherapy, Pimpri Pune, India.Patients were randomly assigned to either a tele-rehabilitation (via Zoom) group or a supervised rehabilitation group; both groups received three rehabilitation sessions per week for 4 weeks.The exercise protocol consisted of mobility, stretching, and strengthening exercises for the affected lower limb, along with balance training.Patients were assessed before and after the intervention using the timed-up-and-go test (TUG) for balance, one-leg standing test for static balance, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) for pain, stiffness, and physical function. Results:Of 86 patients screened for eligibility, 30 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either tele-rehabilitation (n=15) or supervised rehabilitation (n=15).Finally, 28 participants completed the intervention (one dropout in each group).The two groups were comparable in terms of age, body mass index, pain intensity, and baseline outcomes in the TUG test, one-leg standing test, and WOMAC.After the intervention, both groups demonstrated significant improvements in all outcome measures, with the exception of the left-side one-leg standing test in the tele-rehabilitation group (p=0.483).Both groups had similar improvements in TUG test for balance (p=0.640),one-leg standing test for static balance (p=0.541 for right leg, p=0.764 for leftleg), and WOMAC for disability (p=0.837).Conclusions: Tele-rehabilitation and supervised rehabilitation have similar effects on improving balance, physical function, and disability in patients with 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.292 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Gerontology and GeriatricsSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207