MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416645866 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1698983

Opposing needling in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: an improved study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4416645866 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hui Li, Siyu Qian, Yanqin Liu, Yan Guo, Xiaoqin Chen, Yao Hu, Qinglin Fu, Li Q, Yuting Xiang, Ying Liu, Xi Wu, Tingting Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialDry needlingProtocol (science)Clinical trialRandomization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common degenerative joint disease that typically affects individuals over 40 years of age and is characterized by knee pain, stiffness, and functional impairment. Current treatment options, including basic care, pharmacologic therapy, and surgery, often provide limited pain relief or are associated with adverse effects, high costs, and surgical risks. Acupuncture has been conditionally recommended by international guidelines for KOA management and has shown beneficial effects in alleviating pain and improving function. However, most studies have investigated single modalities such as manual acupuncture or electroacupuncture, leaving opportunities to explore strategies that may further enhance therapeutic outcomes. Opposing needling, a classical technique involving contralateral point selection, has demonstrated superior analgesic effects in various chronic pain conditions and is increasingly applied in KOA. Methods: This two-center randomized controlled trial will enroll 108 eligible patients with KOA, who will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to opposing needling plus electroacupuncture, sham opposing needling plus electroacupuncture, or electroacupuncture alone. The 12-week study comprises an 8-week intervention period and a 4-week follow-up, with treatments administered three times per week. The primary outcome will be the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), while secondary outcomes will include WOMAC subscales, Visual Analog Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, Global Pain Scale, Lequesne Index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Short Form-36 Health Survey. Discussion: The findings are expected to provide robust evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of opposing needling as an adjunctive therapy for KOA and to inform optimized treatment strategies. Clinical trial registration: itmctr.ccebtcm.org.cn, ITMCTR2025001291.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.006

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207