Оценка функционального статуса у больных с различными этиопатогенетическими вариантами коксартроза III стадии
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose. To compare the functional status in patients with different etiopathogenetic variants of Stage III coxarthrosis using various rating scales, questionnaires, and tests. Materials and Methods. The results of testing 48 patients at the age of 20-79 years with Stage III coxarthrosis analyzed in order to determine their functional status. The disease primary form identified in 19 patients, dysplastic one – in 14, and secondary form – in 15. Testing performed using Visual Analogue Scale, Leken’s algo-functional index, McGill Pain Questionnaire modified by V.V. Kuz’menko, Harris test, WOMAC questionnaire. Results. Less marked pain and stiffness of movements established to be experienced by persons with secondary coxarthrosis. Female patients determine pain severity higher than male ones. The emotional component dominates for the pain syndrome in women. While, as for “stiffness sensation” criterion, no substantial differences between the two categories of patients observed. Moreover, the distinctions in the manifestation degree of functional disorders depending on gender and the disease duration not revealed. The maximum level of functional disorders observed for the disease primary form, as well as in patients above 50 years old. Conclusion. The assessment complex applied may be recommended for use in orthopaedic clinics to make additional diagnostics of the functional status in patients with different variants of Stage III coxarthrosis. This complex allows analyzing some parameters impracticable to be studied by other clinical techniques, and that is important in the assessment of the performed treatment effectiveness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
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".