Individuals with severe knee osteoarthritis (OA) exhibit altered proximal walking mechanics compared with individuals with less severe OA and those without knee pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine hip, pelvis, and trunk walking biomechanics in individuals with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA) of varying radiographic disease severities and others without knee pain. METHODS: Hip, pelvis, and trunk kinematics and hip kinetics were assessed in 75 individuals with radiographically confirmed OA and 20 asymptomatic individuals. Differences in peak hip adduction and abduction angles, the amount of contralateral pelvic drop, and peak lateral trunk lean measured by 3-dimensional gait analysis were examined using analyses of variance. Peak external hip abduction and adduction moments were compared using analyses of covariance, with gait speed as a covariate. RESULTS: Those with severe OA disease exhibited significantly less peak hip adduction (5.0°), but more ipsilateral trunk lean toward the study extremity (5.0°) than all other groups (P < 0.001). Those in the severe (1.1°) and asymptomatic (0.9°) groups also exhibited significantly less lateral trunk lean toward the non-study extremity (P = 0.004). No significant differences in hip joint moments or contralateral pelvic drop were observed between the groups (P > 0.02). CONCLUSION: Gait changes at the hip and trunk were evident across the groups based on radiographic disease severity and compared with those without knee pain. Although not conclusive from this cross-sectional study design, the results provide initial evidence to support increased lateral trunk lean as being a compensatory response to the disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".