MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6964643273 · doi:10.26181/22338529

Kinesio Taping does not improve the symptoms or function of older people with knee osteoarthritis: a randomised trial

2016· article· en· W6964643273 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLa Trobe University · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialMuscle strengthOlder peopleVisual analogue scaleConcentric

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Question: Does Kinesio Taping reduce pain and swelling, and increase muscle strength, function and knee-related health status in older people with knee osteoarthritis? Design: Randomised, controlled trial with concealed allocation, intention-to-treat analysis and blinded assessment. Participants: Seventy-six older people with knee osteoarthritis. Intervention: The experimental group received three simultaneous Kinesio Taping techniques to treat pain, strength and swelling. The control group received sham taping. All participants kept the taping on for 4 days. Outcome measures: The outcomes were: concentric muscle strength of knee extensors and flexors, measured by isokinetic dynamometry with an angular velocity of 60 deg/second normalised for body mass [(Nm/kg) x 100 (%)]; pressure pain threshold via digital pressure algometry (kgf/cm2); lower-limb swelling via volumetry (l) and perimetry (cm); physical function via the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale (0 = worst to 100 = best); and knee-related health status via the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index (0 = best to 96 = worst). Outcomes were measured at Day 4 (end of the taping period) and Day 19 (follow-up) after the start of the treatment. Results: At Day 4, there were no significant between-group differences for knee extensor muscle strength (MD -1%, 95% CI -7 to 5), knee flexor muscle strength (MD 2%, 95% CI -3 to 7), the pressure pain threshold at any measured point, volumetry (MD 0.05 L, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.11), perimetry at any measured point, Lysholm score (MD -4 points, 95% CI -9 to 2), or WOMAC score (MD -2 points, 95% CI -8 to 4). The lack of significant between-group difference was also seen at the follow-up assessment on Day 19. Conclusion: The Kinesio Taping techniques investigated in this study provided no beneficial effects for older people with knee osteoarthritis on any of the assessed outcomes. Trial registration: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials, RBR-36r3t5. [Wageck B, Nunes GS, Bohlen NB, Santos GM, de Noronha M (2016) Kinesio Taping does not improve the symptoms or function of older people with knee osteoarthritis: a randomised trial. Journal of Physiotherapy 62: 153-158].

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLa Trobe UniversitySame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207