MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THE CLINICAL IMPORTANCE OF MENISCAL TEARS DEMONSTRATED BY MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING IN OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE☆

2003· article· en· W1910555202 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Timothy Bhattacharyya, D. Gale, PETER DEWIRE, Saara Tötterman, M. Elon Gale, Sara McLaughlin, Thomas A. Einhorn, David T. Felson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicineAsymptomaticWOMACMagnetic resonance imagingTearsRadiographyKnee painSurgeryRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Meniscal tears are frequently found during magnetic resonance imaging of osteoarthritic knees. However, the prevalence and clinical relevance of these tears have not been determined. This study was designed to investigate the relationship between meniscal tears and osteoarthritis and between such tears and pain in patients with osteoarthritis. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging and plain radiography of the knee were performed in a group of 154 patients with clinical symptoms of knee osteoarthritis and a group of forty-nine age-matched asymptomatic controls. Pain scores (according to a 100-mm visual analog scale) and functional scores (according to the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) were determined for ninety-one of the patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis. Meniscal tears were defined as tears extending to an articular surface as seen on magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: A medial or lateral meniscal tear was a very common finding in the asymptomatic subjects (prevalence, 76%) but was more common in the patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis (91%) (p < 0.005). In the group with symptomatic osteoarthritis, a higher Kellgren-Lawrence radiographic grade was correlated with a higher frequency of meniscal tears (r = 0.26, p < 0.001), and men had a higher prevalence of meniscal tears than did women (p < 0.01). However, there was no significant difference with regard to the pain or WOMAC score between the patients with and those without a medial or lateral meniscal tear in the osteoarthritic group (p = 0.8 to 0.9 for all comparisons). The power of the study was 80% to detect a difference in the WOMAC scores of 15 points and a difference in the scores on the visual analog scale of 16 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Meniscal tears are highly prevalent in both asymptomatic and clinically osteoarthritic knees of older individuals. However, osteoarthritic knees with a meniscal tear are not more painful than those without a tear, and the meniscal tears do not affect functional status. These data do not support the routine use of magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation and management of meniscal tears in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic study, Level I-1 (testing of previously developed diagnostic criteria in series of consecutive patients [with universally applied reference "gold" standard]). See p. 2 for complete description of levels of evidence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations405
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207