E68. Gender Differences in the Relations Between Clinical Questionnaires and Radiographic Grades in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of 518 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: To evaluate the correlations between common clinical OA diagnostic tools in order to determine the value of each. A secondary goal was to investigate the influence of gender differences on the findings Methods: Five hundred and eighteen patients with knee OA were evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire, short form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey and plain radiographs. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the different domains of the WOMAC and SF-36 questionnaires between genders and the radiographic scale. Results: Higher knee OA X-ray grade were associated with worse clinical outcome: for women, higher scores for the WOMAC pain, function and final scores and lower scores in the SF-36 final score; in men, lower SF-36 overall and physical domains scores. Gender differences were found in all clinical scores that were tested, with women having worse clinical scores for similar radiographic grading (P-value <0.001).
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".