MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992003917

Intra-articular ozone or hyaluronic acid injection: Which one is superior in patients with knee osteoarthritis? A 6-month randomized clinical trial

2018· article· en· W6992003917 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShahidRandomized controlled trialOsteoarthritisRehabilitationVisual analogue scaleHyaluronic acidClinical trialOzone therapy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seyed Ahmad Raeissadat,1,2 Seyed Mansoor Rayegani,2 Bijan Forogh,3 Porya Hassan Abadi,4 Mahsa Moridnia,5 Shahram Rahimi Dehgolan6 1Clinical Development Research Center of Shahid Modarres Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences,Tehran, Iran 2Shohada-e-Tajrish Hospital, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; 3College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham Medical School, Birmingham, UK; 4Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, Iran University of Medical Sciences, 5Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Deputy of Education, 6Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Purpose: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease, imposing a great burden through pain and decreased function. There are many therapeutic modalities including non-pharmacologic choices and oral, topical, and intra-articular medications. New studies have shown promising results for ozone application in knee OA. Our aim was to compare the effects of ozone therapy versus hyaluronic acid (HA) intra-articular injection in knee OA patients.Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, a total of 174 patients with more than 3 months of chronic pain or swelling in the knee joints along with consistent imaging findings were enrolled and randomly allocated into two groups of HA and ozone, which were planned to undergo 3 weekly injections of HA (Hyalgan®) and 10 mL of a 30 µg/mL ozone solution, respectively. Patients were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after the last injection for pain, stiffness, and function using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire. Results: No major adverse events were detected in this study. Total WOMAC score decreased from 40.8±9.8 to 20.4±4.9 (p<0.01) in the ozone group and from 38.5±7.9 to 17.1±4.2 (p<0.01) in the HA group. A similar trend was observed in pain improvement according to VAS. Pain, stiffness, and function significantly improved in both the groups, but no between-group difference was found.Conclusion: Although both ozone and HA can be effectively used for improving function and reducing pain in selected knee OA patients, neither of the two showed any superiority at 6-month follow-up. Keywords: ozone, hyaluronic acid, knee osteoarthritis

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207