Fatigue in osteoarthritis: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".