Associations Between Knee Effusion-synovitis and Joint Structural Changes in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the associations between effusion-synovitis and joint structural abnormalities in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) over 24 months. METHODS: A posthoc analysis using data from a randomized controlled trial in 413 patients with symptomatic OA (aged 63 ± 7 yrs, 208 women). Knee effusion-synovitis volume and score, cartilage defects, cartilage volume, and bone marrow lesions (BML) were assessed using magnetic resonance imaging. Joint space narrowing (JSN) and osteophytes were assessed using radiograph. Least significant change criterion was used to define change in effusion-synovitis volume. Knee symptoms were assessed by Western Ontario and McMaster University OA Index. Multivariable linear/logistic regression and multilevel generalized mixed-effects models were used in longitudinal analyses. RESULTS: Total effusion-synovitis volume increased modestly from baseline (8.0 ± 8.5 ml) to followup (9.0 ± 10.5 ml). Baseline BML, cartilage defect, JSN, and osteophyte scores were positively associated with change in effusion-synovitis volume (p < 0.05). Baseline cartilage defects and JSN were also associated with change in effusion-synovitis score (p < 0.05). However, neither baseline effusion-synovitis score nor volume consistently predicted change in the above structures except cartilage volume. In the mixed-effects models, knee effusion-synovitis was positively associated with BML (volume: β = 1.19 ml/grade; score: OR = 1.75/grade) and cartilage defects (volume: β = 1.87 ml/grade; score: OR = 2.22/grade), while negatively associated with cartilage volume loss. Change in effusion-synovitis volume was positively correlated with changes in knee pain and stiffness scores (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Knee cartilage and subchondral bone abnormalities predicted change in effusion-synovitis, but effusion-synovitis did not predict knee structural changes. These findings suggest that synovial inflammation is likely the result of joint structural abnormalities in established OA. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01176344. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000495022.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".