MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1608297389 · doi:10.1002/art.20825

Reports of joint instability in knee osteoarthritis: Its prevalence and relationship to physical function

2004· article· en· W1608297389 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Center, University of Pittsburgh
KeywordsOsteoarthritisKnee JointKnee painMedicinePhysical therapyRehabilitationInstabilityAffect (linguistics)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report the prevalence and relationship of self-reported knee instability to physical function in a sample of subjects with knee osteoarthritis (OA), and to discuss the implications of these observations for rehabilitation. METHODS: Subjects were 105 individuals (80 females) with knee OA who rated their knee instability severity on a 6-point numeric scale in response to the query "To what degree does giving way, buckling, or shifting of the knee affect your level of daily activity?" A principal component analysis was used to combine The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities pain, stiffness, and physical function subscale scores, and the Timed Get Up and Go Test score into a principal component score for physical function (PCPF). Other variables that could affect the PCPF such as age, sex, years with knee OA, radiographic severity of knee OA, knee pain, knee motion, and quadriceps strength were also recorded. The prevalence of self-reported knee instability was determined by calculating the proportion of subjects who reported each severity level of knee instability. Hierarchical regression analysis was performed to determine if the level of self-reported knee instability could predict the PCPF, even after accounting for the effects of the other variables. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of the subjects reported knee instability during activities of daily living, and 44% reported that instability affects their ability to function. The severity of self-reported knee instability was associated with the PCPF (eta2=0.40, P <0.001), and after controlling for all other independent variables, significantly increased the prediction of the PCPF (r2=0.56, r2 change=0.05; P <0.001). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that a substantial proportion of individuals with knee OA report episodes of knee instability during activities of daily living, and instability affects physical function beyond that which can be explained by contributions from other impairments such as knee pain, range of motion, and quadriceps strength. Knee instability is a problem that should be specifically addressed in rehabilitation programs and may require interventions beyond those that address pain, joint motion, and muscular strength, to maximize the effectiveness of rehabilitation for individuals with knee OA.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.285 · 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