MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417312048 · doi:10.1177/19417381251397956

Early Effects of Kinesio Taping on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4417312048 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Health A Multidisciplinary Approach · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialRotator cuffRotator cuff injuryContext (archaeology)RehabilitationArthroscopyMEDLINERange of motion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Kinesio tape (KT) is being applied increasingly in physical therapy and rehabilitation. This trial aimed to examine the effect of KT in terms of functional outcomes in people undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). Hypothesis: KT after ARCR will reduce pain and edema. Study Design: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Level of Evidence: Level 1b. Methods: A total of 45 patients who underwent ARCR were assigned randomly to 1 of 3 groups: KT (n = 15), sham taping (ST, n = 15), and control (n = 15). Participants received a conservative physiotherapy program. The physiotherapy program, which was conservative in nature, covered the first 7 weeks after surgery. In addition to the program, patients in the KT group were also treated with KT, while those in the ST group received ST. Pain levels (visual analog scale), edema, and functional scores (Western-Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, Modified Constant-Murley Shoulder Score, Revised Oxford Shoulder Score, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index) were evaluated at regular intervals throughout the treatment. Results: Baseline characteristics of the groups were similar ( P > 0.05). All evaluation parameters showed significant improvement over time in all 3 groups ( P < 0.05). There were no differences between the groups in any of the parameters when analyzed for group × time interactions ( P > 0.05). Conclusion: This study found no efficacy of KT after ARCR in reducing pain and edema and improving shoulder function in the short- or medium-term. Clinical Relevance: Clinicians should not expect additional short- or medium-term benefits from KT in reducing pain and edema or improving shoulder function after ARCR.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.349 · 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