MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1600256781 · doi:10.1002/acr.22495

Contralateral Knee Effect on Self‐Reported Knee‐Specific Function and Global Functional Assessment: Data From the Osteoarthritis Initiative

2014· article· en· W1600256781 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sebastian Cotofana, W. Wirth, Claudia Peña Rossi, F. Eckstein, Oliver H. Günther

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea National Institute of HealthNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleMerck KGaA
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyKnee JointFunction (biology)SurgeryAlternative medicinePathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of contralateral knee pain on sensitivity of patient-reported outcomes and objectively measured functional performance tests in subjects with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Subjects with discordant knee pain status (i.e., 1 knee being painful [≥4 on a numeric pain rating scale (NPRS)], with the contralateral knee being pain free [NPRS 0]) were selected from the Osteoarthritis Initiative and matched to subjects with bilaterally pain-free and painful knees by age, sex, body mass index, and radiographic knee OA. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical function score, the global Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE), and objective functional performance tests were cross-sectionally compared in a matched case-control design. RESULTS: A total of 378 subjects with discordant knee pain status were matched to 359 controls with bilaterally pain-free knees and to 323 controls with bilaterally painful knees. WOMAC scores in pain-free knees of discordant knee pain cases significantly differed compared to scores of bilaterally pain-free knees (P = 0.003). Likewise, scores in painful knees of discordant knee pain cases significantly differed compared to scores of bilaterally painful knees (P < 0.001). PASE levels between these groups were not significantly different (P > 0.68). Functional performance tests differed in subjects with discordant knee pain compared to subjects with bilaterally pain-free knees and when compared to subjects with bilaterally painful knees, with the chair stand test showing the strongest effect size (standardized response mean 0.28 and 0.33, respectively). CONCLUSION: The WOMAC physical function score, although knee specific, is impacted by the contralateral knee pain status. The repeated chair stand test appears to be the most sensitive assessment in differentiation between groups with different status of knee pain.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207