MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412847737 · doi:10.59923/champions.v3i1.74

The Effect of Isometric Exercise on Changes in Pain and Functional Activity in Osteoarthritis Knee Patients at Samarinda Class IV Hospital

2025· article· en· W4412847737 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sulfandi Sulfandi, Dwina Rosyida

Bibliographic record

VenueChampions Education Journal of Sport Health and Recreation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsometric exerciseOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationKnee painAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteoarthritis of the knee is a degenerative disease that directly impacts joint cartilage, characterized by pain and stiffness, causing a decrease in function and quality of life of sufferers. This study aimed to determine the effect of giving isometric exercise on pain and functional activity changes in patients with knee osteoarthritis at Hospital Level IV in Samarinda. This study used a pre-experimental method with a pre-test and post-test one-group design approach. Seventeen knee osteoarthritis respondents with pain and functional activity disturbances were given an isometric exercise with a frequency of three times a week for one month. The measurement tool used to evaluate pain and functional activity was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The statistical test using the paired sample t-test showed that p <0.05 indicated that giving isometric exercise affected in pain and functional activity changes in patients with knee osteoarthritis at Hospital Level IV in Samarinda, then H0 was rejected, and Ha was accepted. This indicates that giving isometric exercise affects changes in pain and functional activity in osteoarthritis knee at Hospital Level IV in Samarinda.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueChampions Education Journal of Sport Health and RecreationSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207