Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research sought to influence clinical management and treatment of Achilles tendinopathy by: 1) evaluating the efficacy of sclerotherapy (with a 25% dextrose and 0.5% lidocaine sclerosant) over the course of one year; 2) evaluating the effectiveness of a 12 week standardized home based heavy load eccentric training program; and 3) describing the prevalence of neovascularisation in adults with disease and without, and prevalence after treatment. Specifically, it provides the first short term data from a prospective triple blinded randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of ultrasound guided sclerosing 25% dextrose and 0.5% lidocaine injections following failure of eccentric exercises. Sclerotherapy was an efficacious treatment in the short term (3 months) with all patients showing statistically significant improvement in pain and function (as measured by the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles outcome measure), but its positive effects decreased for some patients after one year. With regards to neovascularisation, it was present in all affected tendons (and in one individual without the disease), but change in the number of neovessels does not appear to affect symptoms. With regard to eccentric training, it was found to not be effective in the majority of patients with only two patients considering themselves satisfied with treatment. Based on these results, a treatment paradigm and future research directions are provided. Most notably, eccentric training is not recommended as an effective treatment option for Achilles tendinopathy. Sclerotherapy is recommended as a treatment option for both mid-portion and enthesopathy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".