MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992147377 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.080675

Is There an Urban-Rural Divide? Population Surveys of Rheumatic Musculoskeletal Disorders in the Pune Region of India Using the COPCORD Bhigwan Model

2009· article· en· W1992147377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
VAIJAYANTI LAGU JOSHI, Arvind Chopra

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAsia Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology
KeywordsMedicineRheumatologyInternal medicinePhysical therapyShouldersPopulationRheumatoid arthritisRheumatismAnkleAnkylosing spondylitisWristConfidence intervalOsteoarthritisSurgeryPathologyEnvironmental healthAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate urban prevalence of rheumatic musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders and compare to an earlier rural regional study. METHODS: We screened 8145 adults from a preselected urban locality in Pune, India, for MSK pain in a cross-sectional house-to-house survey (Stage I) over 20 weeks. The World Health Organization-International League of Associations for Rheumatology (WHO-ILAR) Community Oriented Program for Control of Rheumatic Diseases (COPCORD) Bhigwan model was used. Thirty trained community volunteers completed Phases I and II questionnaires, concurrent with rheumatology evaluation (Phase III). Clinical diagnosis was based on standard diagnosis/classification criteria. Point prevalence rates from our survey and the earlier Bhigwan village (Pune district) survey were standardized (adjusted age-sex to India population census 2001) and are reported for osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), seronegative spondyloarthritis (SSA), and inflammatory arthritis (IA). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred fifty-two urban cases (65% women) were identified (14.1%, 95% confidence interval 13.4, 14.9). The self-reported pain sites (Phase II) were hip (0.4), knees (6.3), ankle (1.9), feet (0.7), shoulders (2), hands (1.3), wrist (1.2), neck (1.9), upper back (1.7), low back (5.5), thigh (1.5), calf (1.4), and sole (0.8); corresponding rural sites being hip (1.1), knees (13.7), ankle (7), feet (1.6), shoulders (7.9), hands (6.3), wrist (6.9), neck (6.8), upper back (8.4), low back (12.6), thigh (4.8), calf (7.1) and sole (2.2). OA disorders, soft tissue rheumatism (STR) and ill-defined aches and pains were predominant in both surveys; < 10% reported IA. The major disorders among urban cases were OA (4), STR (1.2), RA (0.2, ACR criteria 1988), undifferentiated IA (0.3), SSA (0.3), and gout (0.06); corresponding rates in Bhigwan were OA (6.3), STR (3.8), RA (0.5), undifferentiated IA (0.8), SSA (0.3), and gout (0.1). Infections were conspicuously absent. CONCLUSION: While similar in spectrum, standardized prevalence rates of self-reported pain sites and rheumatic MSK disorders were significantly lower in the urban (current Pune COPCORD surveys) versus rural (Bhigwan) community, and in both communities aches and pains that are poorly understood by modern science were predominant.

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)0.003
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations152
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicMusculoskeletal Disorders and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207