Hazard of Incident and Progressive Knee and Hip Radiographic Osteoarthritis and Chronic Joint Symptoms in Individuals with and without Limb Length Inequality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the hazard of incident and progressive radiographic osteoarthritis (rOA) and chronic joint symptoms at the hip and knee by limb length inequality (LLI) in a large, community-based sample. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort completed baseline (1991-97) clinical evaluation and identical followup assessment (1999-2003) (median followup time 5.9 yrs, range 3.0-13.1 yrs). LLI was defined at baseline as a measured difference between limbs ≥ 2 cm. The study groups with LLI data comprised 1583 participants with paired (baseline and followup) knee radiographs and 1453 participants with paired hip radiographs. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to examine the hazard of incident and progressive knee and hip rOA and chronic joint symptoms, with adjustment for demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: The hazard of developing incident knee or hip rOA was 20%-30% higher and of developing progressive knee or hip rOA was 35%-83% higher among participants with LLI, but results were only statistically significant for progressive knee rOA (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.83, 95% CI 1.10-3.05). The hazards of progressive chronic knee symptoms and incident and progressive chronic hip symptoms were 13%-59% higher among participants with LLI, but were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: LLI was associated with progressive knee rOA and was nonsignificantly associated with incident knee or hip rOA and progressive hip rOA, progressive chronic knee symptoms, and incident and progressive chronic hip symptoms. Longer studies may strengthen these associations and help determine whether LLI is a risk factor or marker of these outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".