MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023896604 · doi:10.1002/art.10538

Racial differences in social network experience and perceptions of benefit of arthritis treatments among New York City Medicare beneficiaries with self‐reported hip and knee pain

2002· article· en· W2023896604 on OpenAlexaff
Valerie A. Blake, John P. Allegrante, Laura Pope Robbins, Carol A. Mancuso, Margaret G. E. Peterson, John M. Esdaile, Stephen A. Paget, Mary E. Charlson

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsArthritis Research Centre of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyKnee painHip painKnee arthritisTelephone surveyPopulationHip surgeryOsteoarthritisArthritisAlternative medicineSurgeryArthroplastyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether social network experience and perceptions of benefit of arthritis treatments influence the decision to seek diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: A population-based telephone survey of 515 black and 455 white Medicare beneficiaries was conducted. Validated questionnaires adapted for use in a telephone interview were used to identify people with self-reported symptoms of hip or knee pain. Treatment history for arthritis-related pain and perceptions of benefit of treatment were also assessed. RESULTS: Forty-two percent of blacks and 31% of whites reported hip or knee pain. Forty-two percent of blacks and 65% of whites reported knowing someone who had surgery for hip or knee pain (P < 0.0001). Blacks were less likely than whites to report that surgery had helped someone they knew with hip or knee pain (not significant). CONCLUSION: Blacks know fewer people who have had surgical treatment of hip and knee pain than whites and appear to be less likely to perceive that such treatment is beneficial.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations39
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207