Knee pain in the ACL‐deficient osteoarthritic knee and its relationship to quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Pain during activities of daily living is a common presenting complaint of individuals with knee osteoarthritis and anterior cruciate ligament injury. Knee pain is also associated with a decrease in quality of life for people with osteoarthritis. The purpose of the present study was to examine the dose-response relationship between knee joint forces and painful symptoms, and whether the acute symptoms, were associated with individuals' quality of life. METHOD: This was a cross-sectional cohort correlation study. Seventeen individuals with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knees diagnosed with ipsilateral knee osteoarthritis completed the ACL quality of life questionnaire (ACL-QOL). The subjects also rated pain associated with each of five incremental isometric knee extension tests, proportional to their body weight. Analysis of variance was used to assess the association between pain and normalized torque. Linear regression was used to assess the correlation between the ACL-QOL score and the total pain experienced during the graded test. RESULTS: A strong relationship was found between the level of perceived knee pain and the amount of isometric torque produced (Pearson's r = 0.98; p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant relationship between pain during the graded isometric test and the ACL-QOL (Pearson's r = -0.56; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Since knee joint compression is a function of active isometric knee extension torque, increased painful symptoms were associated with increased compression forces at the knee joint for these subjects. The relationship between pain provocation and disease-specific quality of life provides evidence for the proposed joint provocation test for this subject population. Weakness caused by osteoathritis (OA) may, in part, be a negative conditioning response that would need to be overcome in rehabilitation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".