COMPARAÇÃO DA FUNCIONALIDADE, AGILIDADE E EQUILÍBRIO DINÂMICO DE IDOSAS COM E SEM OSTEOARTRITE DE JOELHOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMO Objetivamos comparar a função muscular e a funcionalidade entre idosas com OA de joelho (GOA=15) e idosas assintomáticas (GAS=18). Foram mensurados dados antropométricos, funcionalidade e qualidade de vida por meio de um questionário específico para OA, Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Osteoarthritis Index e um conjunto de testes funcionais:Short Physical Performance Battery,TimedUpand Go Teste Teste de Caminhada de 6 minutos. A normalidade dos dados foi verificada pelo teste deKolmogrov-Smirnov. Para as variáveis com distribuição normal foi aplicado o teste "T" de Student para amostras independentes e o teste não paramétrico "U" Mann-Whitney para os dados que não apresentaram normalidade (p<0,05).Os resultados indicam que não há diferenças entre os grupos nas variáveis antropométricas, na idade e no desempenho físico e funcional. Podemos concluir que idosas com osteoartrite de joelho em grau leve e moderado apresentam desempenho físico e funcional semelhante a idosas assintomáticas.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".