Quality of Nonpharmacological Care in the Community for People with Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of nonpharmacological care received by people with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis (OA) in the community and to assess the associated factors. METHODS: We conducted a postal survey to evaluate 4 OA quality-of-care indicators for knee/hip OA: (1) advice to exercise; (2) advice to lose weight; (3) assessment for ambulatory function; and (4) assessment for nonambulatory function, including dressing, grooming, and arising from a seated position. Eligible participants were identified from the administrative database of British Columbia between 1992 and 2006. RESULTS: In total, 1349 participants reported knee and/or hip OA [knee only = 700 (51.9%); hip only = 261 (19.3%); knee and hip = 388 (28.8%)]. Their mean age was 67.1 years (SD 11.1); 816 (60.5%) were women, and 921 (68.3%) were diagnosed with OA for 6 years or longer. The overall pass rate of the 4 quality indicators was 22.4% (95% CI 20.5, 24.3). The pass rate for the individual quality indicator ranged from 6.9% for assessment of nonambulatory function to 29.2% for receiving assessment of ambulatory function. Receiving exercise advice was associated with having a university degree (vs high school diploma; OR 3.10, 95% CI 2.00, 4.80). Receiving weight-loss advice was associated with being female (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.71, 4.08), being aged 55-64 years (compared to being aged 75 and over; OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.02, 3.76), and having higher Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores (for every 10-point increment; OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02, 1.26). On the other hand, having less than a high school education reduced the odds of weight-loss advice (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30, 0.88). CONCLUSION: The quality of nonpharmacological care for people with knee/hip OA in the community is suboptimal. Advice on exercise and weight management may not be provided equally across sex, age, disability, and formal education levels.
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".