Effectiveness of mobilisation with movement (MWM) along with usual care for knee osteoarthritis: a study protocol for a randomised clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common degenerative condition primarily affecting the knee joint. OA is defined as the gradual degradation of the cartilage in the joints, accompanied by changes in the bone underlying the cartilage, the synovial fluid, the ligaments and the muscles around the affected area. Common manifestations of OA include sensations of pain, stiffness and decreased physical movement. The estimated worldwide incidence of OA is 16.0%. The treatment known as mobilisation with movement (MWM) reduces pain and restores a full range of motion in the affected joint. This study will be a randomised, single-blind controlled trial. 50 adult patients diagnosed with knee OA will be recruited. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either MWM or conventional physiotherapy treatment. Outcome measures will include the Numerical Pain Rating Scale for assessing pain intensity, a goniometer for measuring joint range of motion, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index for evaluating functional status. Assessments will be conducted at baseline (pretest) and after the intervention (post-test). The Institutional Review Board of the Bangladesh Health Professions Institute has approved the study. Every participant will give their informed consent, and only authorised people will have access to the anonymised data. The study results will be presented at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number: CTRI/2025/05/086343.
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 | 0.038 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.016 |
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".