Depression and the Overall Burden of Painful Joints: An Examination among Individuals Undergoing Hip and Knee Replacement for Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) report one or more symptomatic joints apart from the one targeted for surgical care. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the association between the burden of multiple symptomatic joints and self-reported depression in patients awaiting joint replacement for OA. Four hundred and seventy-five patients at a single centre were evaluated. Patients self-reported joints that were painful and/or symptomatic most days of the previous month on a homunculus, with nearly one-third of the sample reporting 6 or more painful joints. The prevalence of depression was 12.2% (58/475). When adjusted for age, sex, education level, hip or knee OA, body mass index, chronic condition count, and joint-specific WOMAC scores, each additional symptomatic joint was associated with a 19% increased odds (odds ratio: 1.19 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.31, P < 0.01)) of self-reported depression. Individuals reporting 6 or more painful joints had 2.5-fold or greater odds of depression when compared to those patients whose symptoms were limited to the surgical joint. A focus on the surgical joint alone is likely to miss a potentially important determinant of postsurgical patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing hip or knee replacement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".