Clinico-radiological correlation of osteoarthritis knee using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities score and Kellegren and Lawrance grading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Diagnosis OA is basically based upon clinical and radiological features. In our study we have used a clinical scoring system of OA called as WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) score and a radiological staging system KL staging (Kellegren and Lawrance) OA radiological staging system and correlation between them.Methods: There were total 66 patients with 102 knees. X ray of bilateral knee was taken in weight bearing position (standing) and WOMAC score was calculated. X-rays were assessed with KL grading. WOMAC score a clinical scoring was correlated with a radiological KL grading for the OA of knee.Results: Range of WOMAC score was 11.5-67.7. Mean WOMAC score were 18.75, 31.31, 52.57 and 67.2 in patients of KL grade 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Correlation between KL grading and WOMAC scoring were found to be significant; there were rise in the WOMAC scoring when KL grading increases.Conclusions: Both the KL grading and WOMAC score are directly proportional to each other, and hence, WOMAC scoring can be used to diagnose, assess the progression of the disease and the response to treatment of osteoarthritis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".