Activity-Modifying Behaviour Mediates the Relationship between Pain Severity and Activity Limitations among Adults with Emergent Knee Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether activity-modifying behaviour mediates the relationship between the severity of knee pain and each of physical function and knee-related quality of life. METHODS: A total of 105 participants with medial knee pain and no diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (mean age 52.2 [SD 6.7] y) completed two self-report questionnaires. The Questionnaire to Identify Knee Symptoms assessed activity-modifying behaviour; the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score assessed pain severity, physical function, and knee-related quality of life. Simple mediation analysis was performed using linear regression. RESULTS: The unstandardized regression coefficient for activity-modifying behaviour revealed partial mediation of the effect of pain severity on physical function (0.31 (SE 0.09), p<0.001) and on knee-related quality of life (0.24 (SE 0.07), p<0.001). After accounting for activity-modifying behaviour, the variance in physical function that was explained by pain decreased from 45% to 15%, and the variance in knee-related quality of life that was explained by pain decreased from 64% to 25%. CONCLUSION: Activity-modifying behaviour partially mediates the relationship between pain severity and physical function and between pain severity and knee-related quality of life. Activity-modifying behaviour may thus counteract the impact of knee pain on physical function and knee-related quality of life, which explains why it is used by people with emergent knee pain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".