MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1934538407 · doi:10.1002/art.39271

Symptom Assessment in Knee Osteoarthritis Needs to Account for Physical Activity Level

2015· article· en· W1934538407 on OpenAlexaffabout
Grace H. Lo, Timothy E. McAlindon, Gillian Hawker, Jeffrey B. Driban, Lori Lyn Price, Jing Song, Charles B. Eaton, Marc C. Hochberg, Rebecca D. Jackson, C. Kent Kwoh, Michael C. Nevitt, Dorothy D. Dunlop

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis & Rheumatology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsOsteoarthritisWOMACMedicinePhysical therapyContext (archaeology)Knee painBody mass indexPopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Pain is not always correlated with severity of radiographic osteoarthritis (OA), possibly because people modify activities to manage symptoms. Measures of symptoms that consider pain in the context of activity level may therefore provide greater discrimination than a measure of pain alone. We undertook this study to compare discrimination provided by a measure of pain alone with that provided by combined measures of pain in the context of physical activity across radiographic OA severity levels. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study nested within the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI). The population was drawn from 2,127 persons enrolled in an OAI accelerometer monitoring substudy, including those with and those without knee OA. Two composite pain and activity knee symptom (PAKS) scores were calculated as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score (plus 1) divided by a physical activity measure (step count for the first PAKS score [PAKS1 score] and activity count for the second PAKS score [PAKS2 score]). Symptom score discrimination across Kellgren/Lawrence (K/L) grades was evaluated using histograms and quantile regression. RESULTS: A total of 1,806 participants (55.5% of whom were women) were included (mean ± SD age 65.1 ± 9.1 years, mean ± SD body mass index 28.4 ± 4.8 kg/m(2) ). The WOMAC pain score, but not the PAKS scores, exhibited a floor effect. The adjusted median WOMAC pain scores by K/L grades 0-4 were 0, 0, 0, 1, and 3, respectively. The adjusted median PAKS1 scores were 24.9, 26.0, 32.4, 46.1, and 97.9, respectively, and the adjusted median PAKS2 scores were 7.2, 7.2, 9.2, 12.9, and 23.8, respectively. The PAKS scores had more statistically significant comparisons between K/L grades than did the WOMAC pain score. CONCLUSION: Symptom assessments incorporating pain and physical activity did not exhibit a floor effect and were better able to discriminate radiographic severity than an assessment of pain alone, particularly in milder disease. Pain in the context of physical activity level should be used to assess knee OA symptoms.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations37
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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