The effects of combining electrical stimulation of the calf and thigh muscles on WOMAC pain in knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To explore the effectiveness of a NMES device in improving pain and function for individuals with KOA. Method: This was a randomised, sham-controlled, superiority trial recruiting individuals with symptomatic KOA, with both participants and outcome assessors blinded to the treatment allocation. Participants were randomised to receive either self-administered NMES, consisting of quadriceps (5 times a week) and footplate stimulation (7 times a week), or a sham device for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain domain at week 8. Results: 179 participants were randomised; 50.8 % female, mean (SD) age 66.9 (8.7) years. 164 attended the follow up visit. No difference in the WOMAC pain domain was seen between groups (-0.7; 95 % CI: -1.5, 0.1; P = 0.10), though within group improvements were reported in both groups (NMES: -1.5; 95 % CI: -2.0, 0.8; P < 0.01, sham: -0.8; 95 % CI: -1.4, 0.2; P < 0.01). There were no differences in strength, exercise and functional capacity, swelling, health related quality of life or anxiety and depression between groups. Sub-group analysis for NMES compliance or recruitment source did not change response in primary outcome. Conclusion: Use of an NMES device on the quadriceps and plantar flexors did not enhance pain relief or improve function over the sham control in people with KOA.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".