MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175314691 · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.11.002

Postural Stability in Osteoarthritis of the Knee and Hip: Analysis of Association With Pain Catastrophizing and Fear‐Avoidance Beliefs

2015· article· en· W2175314691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ángel Sánchez‐Herán, Diego Agudo‐Carmona, Raúl Ferrer‐Peña, Ibai López‐de‐Uralde‐Villanueva, Alfonso Gil‐Martínez, Alba Paris‐Alemany

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisWOMACPsychosocialPain catastrophizingPhysical therapyMedicineCoping (psychology)WorryPsychological interventionKnee painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationChronic painClinical psychologyPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Persons with knee osteoarthritis (OA) are at risk of having sensations of instability and sometimes experience buckling. The instability has been associated with psychosocial dysfunction, such as fear of movement, and impaired physical functioning. A high degree of fear of movement is positively correlated with avoidance in other conditions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between postural stability, the degree of pain catastrophizing, and fear-avoidance beliefs in subjects with knee and hip OA. DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional study. SETTING: Four primary health care centers. SUBJECTS: Eighty subjects with knee or combined knee and hip OA. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Postural stability was evaluated using the Multi-Directional Functional Reach Test (MDFRT), and a battery of self-reports was used to assess the following aspects: pain catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale), fear-avoidance beliefs (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia [TSK-11] and the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire), pain (visual analog scale), disability (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]), and self-efficacy (Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale [CPSS]). RESULTS: The correlation analysis showed that scores on the MDFRT were negatively associated with scores on the TSK-11 for activity avoidance (r = -0.54; P < .001) and positively associated with the scores on the CPSS for coping (r = 0.59; P < .001). The scores for the MDFRT to the right and the total WOMAC were negatively associated (r = -0.61, P <.001). The scores for the MDFRT to the left were positively associated with the CPSS scores for coping (r = 0.64, P < .001). The scores for the MDFRT forward were predicted by CPSS and TSK-11 scores (28.9% of variance), as well as activity avoidance, avoidance of physical activity, helplessness (34.7% of variance), and CPSS pain coping (34.3% of variance). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that pain catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs are related with postural stability in subjects with knee and hip OA. Postural stability is negatively correlated with pain catastrophizing and TSK activity avoidance. Thus, based on these results, psychosocial factors should be taken into consideration in the assessment and treatment of patients with hip and knee OA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207