MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022470708 · doi:10.1186/1471-2474-9-63

Fatigue in osteoarthritis: a qualitative study

2008· article· en· W2022470708 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersCanadian Arthritis NetworkCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyDepression (economics)OsteoarthritisCohortPopulationWOMACMental healthRheumatoid arthritisRheumatologyInternal medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is recognized as a disabling symptom in many chronic conditions including rheumatic disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and lupus. Fatigue in osteoarthritis (OA) is not routinely evaluated and has only been considered in a very limited number of studies. To date, these studies have focused primarily on patients with OA under rheumatological care, which represent the minority of people living with OA. The purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of the fatigue experience in community dwelling people with OA. METHODS: In 2004, 8 focus groups were conducted with 28 men and 18 women (mean age 72.3) with symptomatic hip or knee OA recruited from a population-based cohort. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire, which included demographics, measures of OA severity (WOMAC), depression (CES-D) and fatigue (FACIT). Sessions were audio taped and transcribed verbatim. Two researchers independently reviewed the transcripts to identify themes. Findings were compared and consensus reached. RESULTS: Mean pain, disability, depression and fatigue scores were 8.7/20, 27.8/68, 15.4/60, and 30.9/52, respectively. Participants described their fatigue as exhaustion, being tired and "coming up against a brick wall". Participants generally perceived fatigue as different from sleepiness and distinguished physical from mental fatigue. Factors believed to increase fatigue included OA pain and pain medications, aging, various types of weather and poor sleep. Mental health was identified as both affecting fatigue and being affected by fatigue. Participants described fatigue as impacting physical function, and their ability to participate in social activities and to do household chores. Rest, exercise, and avoiding or getting assistance with activities were cited as ways of coping. Participants generally did not discuss their fatigue with anyone except their spouses. CONCLUSION: Participants with OA described experiencing notable amounts of fatigue and indicated that it had a substantial impact on their lives. Further research is required to better understand the role of fatigue in OA in order to identify strategies to reduce its impact.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.299 · 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