MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2203003168 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139923

Gait Biomechanics and Patient-Reported Function as Predictors of Response to a Hip Strengthening Exercise Intervention in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

2015· article· en· W2203003168 on OpenAlexafffund
Dylan Kobsar, Sean T. Osis, Blayne A. Hettinga, Reed Ferber

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsRunning Injury ClinicUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates
KeywordsBiomechanicsOsteoarthritisMedicineGaitPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntervention (counseling)Gait analysisAlternative medicinePathologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Muscle strengthening exercises have been shown to improve pain and function in adults with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis, but individual response rates can vary greatly. Predicting individuals who respond and those who do not is important in developing a more efficient and effective model of care for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use pre-intervention gait kinematics and patient-reported outcome measures to predict post-intervention response to a 6-week hip strengthening exercise intervention in patients with mild-to-moderate knee OA. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis completed a 6-week hip-strengthening program and were subgrouped as Non-Responders, Low-Responders, or High-Responders following the intervention based on their change in Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Predictors of responder subgroups were retrospectively determined from baseline patient-reported outcome measures and kinematic gait parameters in a discriminant analysis of principal components. A 3-4 year follow-up on 16 of the patients with knee OA was also done to examine long-term changes in these parameters. RESULTS: A unique combination of patient-reported outcome measures and kinematic factors was able to successfully subgroup patients with knee osteoarthritis with a cross-validated classification accuracy of 85.4%. Lower patient-reported function in daily living (ADL) scores and hip frontal plane kinematics during the loading response were most important in classifying High-Responders from other sub-groups, while a combination of hip, knee, ankle kinematics were used to classify Non-Responders from Low-Responders. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcome measures and objective biomechanical gait data can be an effective method of predicting individual treatment success to an exercise intervention. Measuring gait kinematics, along with patient-reported outcome measures in a clinical setting can be useful in helping make evidence-based decisions regarding optimal treatment for patients with 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)0.006
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations39
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→