Nutrition supplementation combined with exercise versus exercise alone in treating knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of formula nutrition supplementation (mainly containing glucosamine sulphate, chondroitin sulphate and rhizoma drynariae) plus supervised exercise versus exercise alone for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: This was a double-blinded, single-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. The study recruited 65 participants (40-75 years) with knee OA. Participants were randomly allocated to nutrition supplementation plus exercise (N + E) group or placebo plus exercise (P + E) group. The intervention lasted for 6 months. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included physical function and performance scores, lower extremity strength and serum biomarkers. RESULTS: Among the 65 randomised patients, 56 (86%) completed the trial. At 3 months, more participants in the N + E group than in the P + E group achieved minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in WOMAC total score (19/30 [63.3%] vs 8/26 [30.8%]; P < .01). At 6 months, more participants in the N + E group than in the P + E group achieved MCID in WOMAC stiffness score (19/30 [63.3%] vs 10/26 [38.5%]; P < .05). Meanwhile, at 6 months the decreased percentages of WOMAC stiffness score in the N + E group was greater than in the P + E group (P < .05). The flexor peak torque at 120°/s and 180°/s in the N + E group were significantly higher than those in the P + E group at 3 months (P < .05). Moreover, compared with baseline, improvements in the WOMAC overall and pain score, visual analogue scale pain and 30-second chair stand test were observed in both groups at 6 months. However, these indicators in the N + E group were improved as early as 3 months (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The improvement effects of nutrition supplementation plus exercise were superior to those of exercise alone, and the improvement occurred earlier. Nutrition supplementation plus exercise would be a more efficient strategy for 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".