PSYCHOLOGICAL STATUS MEDIATES THE BIPHASIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OSTEOARTHRITIS AND FALLS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several barriers have prevented adequate evaluation of falls in OA: the lack of homogeneity in OA diagnostic tools used and the heterogeneous nature of OA itself. Therefore, a holistic evaluation of OA and falls using analogous OA definitions to clinical practice is important. This was a case-control study involving 389 individuals aged ≥65 years (229 fallers, 160 non-fallers). Cases were fallers with ≥2 falls or one injurious fall over the past 12 months. Osteoarthritis was defined using three difference criteria: radiological (Kellgren-Lawrence (KL)), cinical and self-reported physician-diagnosed. Severity of symptoms were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire. The total WOMAC score was categorized to asymptomatic, mild, moderate and severe symptoms. Fear of falling (FoF) and psychological status were measured with the short falls efficacy scale-international (FES-I) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) respectively. Individuals with radiological OA and ‘mild’ symptoms had reduced risk of falls compared to those with no reported symptoms [OR: 0.402 (0.172–0.940), p=0.042]. Individuals with clinical OA and ‘severe’ symptoms had increased risk of falls compared to those with ‘mild’ OA [OR: 4.487 (1.883–10.693), p=0.005]. The relationship between mild symptoms and reduced risk of falls was attenuated after controlling for increased anxiety, while the association between severe symptoms among elderly with clinical OA and falls was no longer statistically significant when adjusted for increased FoF. Our findings suggest the previous conflicting evidence on OA and falls is explained by the apparent biphasic relationship based of different diagnostic criteria. The mediating effect of psychological factors for this relationship emphasize the urgent need to develop effective treatment strategies for psychological factors associated with falls.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".