Isokinetic assessment of the hip muscles in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference in isokinetic strength of hip muscles between patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and matched healthy controls, and to establish the correlation between this isokinetic strength and pain and function in patients with knee OA. METHODS: 25 patients with a diagnosis of unilateral knee OA, 25 patients with bilateral knee OA, and 50 matched controls were evaluated using the visual analog scale for pain, knee Lequesne index, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities questionnaire and an isokinetic test. RESULTS: The groups were matched for age, gender and body mass index. The results of the isokinetic test revealed lower peak torque of the hip in patients with OA of the knee than in the control group for all movements studied. Strong correlations were found between the peak torque, visual analog scale and function. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OA of the knee exhibit lower isokinetic strength in the hip muscles than healthy control subjects. Strengthening the muscles surrounding the hip joint may help to decrease pain in people with knee OA. Some correlations between pain/function and peak torque were found.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".