Changes in outcome measures for impairment, activity limitation, and participation restriction over two years in osteoarthritis of the lower extremities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe changes in outcome measures in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) over 2 years according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, and to evaluate the sensitivity to change of available outcome instruments. METHODS: A total of 115 symptomatic knee or hip OA patients (mean age 60.0 years, 80% women) were followed for 2 years. Standardized knee and hip radiographs were scored for joint space narrowing (JSN) using the Osteoarthritis Research Society International Atlas. Pain intensity in knees and hips was graded during physical examination. Self-reported pain and functioning were assessed with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC). Social functioning was assessed with social functioning scores of the RAND 36-item Health Survey. Standardized response means (SRMs) were calculated to evaluate sensitivity to change. RESULTS: Substantial increases in JSN and pain intensity total scores over 2 years were observed (SRMs 0.43 and 0.41, respectively). Twenty-three percent of patients had an increase of at least 1 point in JSN total scores. An increase in pain intensity total scores was present in 46% of patients, whereas a decrease was observed in 19.1.% of patients. WOMAC pain and function scores showed small increases (SRMs 0.15 and 0.18, respectively). No change was seen in social functioning scores (SRM 0.01). CONCLUSION: Objective instruments measuring impairment in body structures and function are more sensitive to change over 2 years in patients with OA than self-reported measurements of impairment in body function, activity limitation, and participation restriction. These findings encourage development of new instruments to improve measurement of disease outcome in OA.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".