The effectiveness of a 3-week spa therapy on the 6-month mobility and functional ability of patients with knee osteoarthritis: the ANGELLO randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spa therapy is a potential treatment for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). The primary objective of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to investigate the effectiveness of a 3-week spa therapy intervention on the 6-month change in function (mobility and functional ability) of KOA patients. Secondary objectives examined the effectiveness of the intervention on KOA-related pain, stiffness, overall symptoms severity, and patient's quality of life. Community-dwelling adults, aged 50-80 years-old with KOA were randomized to spa therapy intervention or control (usual care) group. The primary outcome measure was assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) function subscale. Other outcome measures were the WOMAC pain subscale and a pain visual analog scale, the WOMAC stiffness subscale, the WOMAC total scores, the EQ-5D-3 L for quality-of-life, and patient reported outcomes. Among the 173 individuals randomized, 145 (n = 74 in spa therapy, mean age 67.5 ± 6.4, 67.6% women; n = 71 in controls, mean age 68.3 ± 6.7, 64.8% women) were analyzed. A significant between-group mean difference of 11.7 points in the WOMAC function subscale, favoring the spa therapy group, was found at six months follow-up (primary outcome measure). The intervention was effective in significantly improving most secondary outcomes, including the WOMAC stiffness, pain (and pain visual analog scale) and total scores, as well as the minimum clinically meaningful changes in KOA symptoms, and patient's quality of life. Improvements were achieved during the intervention period and remained significant over the 6-month follow-up. This work demonstrated the effectiveness of spa therapy in KOA treatment.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".