Work disability among workers with osteoarthritis of the knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) among individuals active in the workforce will increase considerably in the next generation and a significant percentage of these individuals are expected to experience work disability because of this disease. The aim of this review was to summarize the existing knowledge on the following: (a) work disability risk factors; (b) reliable and valid work disability assessment tools; and (c) efficient interventions to reduce work disability in individuals with knee OA. An electronic document search using key words and MeSH terms was performed with various databases. Two independent investigators were tasked with the screening of articles and quality assessment. A critical appraisal of what is known was performed and recommendations for clinical practice and future research were formulated. The database search yielded 61 references. One article on risk factors, three related to assessment tools, and two on interventions were retained. Age and previous work absence episodes were found to be risk factors of workplace disability. The Work Limitation Questionnaire, the Work Instability Scale for Rheumatoid Arthritis, and the Workplace Activity Limitations Scale were psychometrically sound for the population studied. Education-based interventions seem to be more effective than conventional interventions in helping individuals with knee OA return to work faster, reduce the number of days absent from work, and improve their overall well-being. This review is the first to summarize the evidence on work disability risk factors, assessment tools, and interventions for this growing population and to show a critical gap in the existing knowledge.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".