Astragalus membranaceus extract reduces functional knee joint pain: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Concerns regarding the side effects of pharmacotherapy in the management of joint pain have led to increased interest in dietary supplements. Astragalus membranaceus root extract (AME) has been proposed as an alternative approach to relieving knee joint pain. The present study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a standardized AME in patients with functional knee joint pain. Methods A double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 90 adults (18–60 years of age) from Rajalakshmi Hospital and Research Center, Karnataka, India. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 480 mg of AME ( n = 45) or placebo ( n = 45) for 28 days. The primary outcome was knee pain reduction, which was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) after a 6-min walk test. Secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Stair Climb Test (SCT), knee range of motion (ROM), and treatment compliance, evaluated at baseline and at follow-up on days 5, 14, and 28. Patient satisfaction and safety were also assessed. Results The AME group exhibited a significant 30% reduction in knee pain ( p < 0.0001), with mean VAS scores dropping from 6.7 ± 0.5 to 1.2 ± 0.6. Significant improvements were observed in the WOMAC, SCT score, and ROM ( p < 0.0001). Patient satisfaction was higher in the active-treatment group, and no serious adverse events were reported. Discussion AME was a safe and effective alternative for the management of knee joint pain and merits further longer-term investigation. Clinical Trial Registration https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?EncHid=OTE3MTU=&Enc=&userName= , identifier CTRI/2023/09/057317.
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 | 0.033 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".