Effect of Ageratum Conyzoides on Osteoarthritis in an Ageing Adult Population: A Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Parallel Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigated Ageratum conyzoides (A. conyzoides) for alleviating osteoarthritis symptoms and improving quality of life. Conducted in Australia between 2021 and 2024, the study included 70 adults aged ≥45 years with clinically diagnosed osteoarthritis. Participants consumed 250 mg of pyrrolizidine alkaloid-free A. conyzoides extract or a placebo daily for 12 weeks. Pain and function were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) every three weeks. Secondary measures included pain assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the SF-36 quality-of-life questionnaire, inflammatory markers, and safety parameters. A. conyzoides supplementation resulted in significant reductions in total WOMAC scores at weeks 9 and 12 (p < 0.05) compared to placebo. VAS pain scores were significantly lower at weeks 9 and 12 (p < 0.05). SF-36 scores improved significantly in the pain and role limitations due to physical health domains (p < 0.05). Plasma inflammatory markers IL-6 and IL-8 showed significant reductions compared with placebo (p < 0.05). No between-group differences were observed for adverse events. These findings demonstrate that A. conyzoides supplementation is a safe and effective option for reducing osteoarthritis symptoms, with significant improvements observed in pain, function, and inflammatory markers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".