MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410640124 · doi:10.3390/jcm14113655

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of CollaSel PRO® Type I and Type III Hydrolyzed Collagen Peptides in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial

2025· article· en· W4410640124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Devrim Demir Dora, Serpil Tuna, Emel Doğan Kurtoğlu, Savaş Gürsoy, Nilüfer Balcı, Selim Tezman, Aydın Erenmemişoğlu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboOsteoarthritisWOMACAnkleRandomized controlled trialDouble blindInternal medicineClinical trialPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral supplementation with hydrolyzed collagen peptides (HCP) type I and type III (CollaSel PRO®) in reducing joint pain and stiffness and improving physical function in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05369780; approved by the Institutional Review Board), 160 adult patients with OA (mean age 52.4 ± 4.3 years; 111 females, 49 males) were randomly assigned to receive either 10 g/day of CollaSel PRO® (n = 80) or placebo (maltodextrin, n = 80) for 8 weeks. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was used to evaluate knee and hip joints, and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scale (AOFAS-AHFS) was used for ankle joints. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at weeks 1, 4, and 8. Results: In the CollaSel PRO® group, a significant decrease in WOMAC scores (mean ± SD 50.5 ± 17.0, 40.7 ± 16.9 and 33.8 ± 16.5 vs. 53.7 ± 16.9, respectively, p < 0.001 for each) and significant increase in AOFAS-AHFS scores (64.2 ± 13.1, 73.6 ± 12.3 and 80.8 ± 9.9 vs. 61.8 ± 13.9, respectively, p < 0.001 for each) were noted at weeks 1, 4, and 8 compared to the baseline scores. WOMAC scores were significantly lower in comparing HCP and placebo, and AOFAS-AHFS scores were higher in the HCP group compared to the placebo group at weeks 4 and 8 (all p < 0.001). Conclusions: CollaSel PRO® appears to be a safe and effective option for the symptomatic management of osteoarthritis. It significantly improved joint pain, stiffness, and physical function in multiple joints. These improvements are not only statistically significant but also clinically meaningful, supporting the need for longer-term evaluation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→