[Acupuncture combined with blade needle therapy for knee osteoarthritis：a randomized controlled trial].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of acupuncture combined with blade needle therapy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods: A total of 60 patients with KOA were randomly divided into an observation group and a control group, 30 cases each group. The control group received acupuncture at Neixiyan (EX-LE4)，Dubi (ST35), Yinlingquan (SP9), Liangqiu (ST34), Xuehai (SP10), Yanglingquan (GB34) and Zusanli (ST36) on the affected side, once every other day, 3 times a week. The observation group received blade needle therapy on the basis of the treatment in the control group, once every 3 days, 2 times a week. Both groups were treated for 4 weeks. Before treatment, after 2, 4 weeks of treatment, and after 1 month of treatment completion (in follow-up), the scores of pain visual analogue scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) and Lequesne index were observed in the two groups, and the clinical efficacy and safety were evaluated. Results: >0.05). No adverse reactions were observed in either group. Conclusion: Acupuncture combined with blade needle therapy could alleviate pain and promote functional recovery in KOA patients, and achieve long-lasting improvements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".