Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 388

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Therapeutic trajectory following intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection in knee osteoarthritis – meta-analysis

Open access
Bannuru, R.R., Natov, N.S., Dasi, U.R., Schmid, C.H., McAlindon, T.E.·2011·Osteoarthritis and Cartilage

Abstract

SUMMARY Objective: To evaluate the therapeutic trajectory of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) vs placebo for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Design: Our data sources include Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, BIOSIS, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Cochrane database; hand searched reviews, manuscripts, and, supplements; author contacts for unpublished data. Randomized trials that reported effects of IAHA vs placebo on knee OA were selected based on inclusion criteria. We computed effect sizes for change from baseline at 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 weeks, using Bayesian random effects model. We performed multivariate analyses adjusting for correlation between time points. Meta-regressions were performed adjusting for potential confounders. Results: The 54 eligible trials included 7545 participants. The conduct and quality of these trials varied in number of aspects. The effect size (ES) favored IAHA by week 4 (0.31; 95% CI 0.17, 0.45), reaching peak at week 8 (0.46; 0.28, 0.65), and then trending downwards, with a residual detectable effect at week 24 (0.21; 0.10, 0.31). This therapeutic trajectory was consistent among the subset of high quality trials and on multivariate analysis adjusting for correlation between time points. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis highlights a therapeutic trajectory of IAHA for knee OA pain over 6 months post-intervention. With this additional perspective, we are able to infer that IAHA is efficacious by 4 weeks, reaches its peak effectiveness at 8 weeks and exerts a residual detectable at 24 weeks. On the other hand, the peak effect size (0.46; 0.28, 0.65), is greater than published effects from other OA analgesics [acetaminophen (ES = 0.13; 0.04, 0.22); NSAIDs (ES = 0.29; 0.22, 0.35); COX-2 inhibitors (ES = 0.44; 0.33, 0.55)]. An effect size above 0.20 is considered to be clinically relevant on an individual patient basis in chronic pain conditions such as knee OA. Thus, its properties could have utility for certain clinical situations, or in combination with other therapies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.joca.2010.09.014

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 61 references

Cited by

See all 388

Metadata

Authors
Bannuru, R. R., Natov, N. S., Dasi, U. R., Schmid, C. H., & McAlindon, T. E.
Venue
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-06
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
611-619
ISSN
1063-4584 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2157031907
Cited by
388
References
61
FWCI
16.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Therapeutic trajectory following intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection in knee osteoarthritis – meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.joca.2010.09.014
The paper
Bannuru, R. R., Natov, N. S., Dasi, U. R., Schmid, C. H., & McAlindon, T. E. (2011). Therapeutic trajectory following intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection in knee osteoarthritis – meta-analysis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2010.09.014

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.