Assessment and determinants of aesthetic discomfort in hand osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of the present study are to assess the magnitude and the determinants of aesthetic discomfort in hand osteoarthritis (HOA) 1 2 in 203 consecutive outpatients attending a tertiary care centre (University Hospital) specialised in bone and cartilage metabolism and diagnosed with HOA. A total of 90.1% of the subjects were women. Patient's global assessment of pain used a 100 mm (0-100) Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The patients rated their aesthetic discomfort related to HOA on a 100 mm VAS (0-100) and on a Likert scale (0-7) used for the assessment of aesthetic damage in Forensic (ie, medicolegal assessment) medicine (ranging from 0=no damage to 7=very important damage). Pain, stiffness and function were assessed using Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN). Functional disability was measured using Functional Index for HOA. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed by the Short Form 12 and by EuroQol. Psychological status was measured by Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale. Radiographs were assessed following Verbruggen and Veys 4 and Kellgren and Lawrence. We assessed the presence of erosive osteoarthritis (OA) (ie, at least one joint at the erosive or remodelled phase, 4 and the number of severely affected joints). uantitative variables were expressed by median and IQR (Q1-Q3) due to skewed distributions. Qualitative variables were expressed by number and percentage. In the univariate analysis, association between aesthetic discomfort (VAS), or the magnitude of the aesthetic damage (medicolegal scale), and qualitative parameters was assessed by means of a Student's t test or Kruskal-Wallis test, while correlations with quantitative parameters were tested using Pearson or Spearman rank correlation. All parameters with p<0.25 in the univariate analysis were combined into a multiple regression with stepwise procedure to account for potential confounders. Results were considered statistically significant at the 5% level ( p<0.05).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".