Frontal plane hip joint loading according to pain severity in people with hip osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary objective was to examine the hip adduction moment during walking in people with hip osteoarthritis (OA) according to pain severity. Sixty-eight participants with unilateral symptomatic hip OA were included. Pain during walking was assessed on a 5-point Likert item within the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index (no pain = 12; mild pain n = 37; moderate pain n = 19). Measures of the external hip adduction moment (peaks, Nm/BW × BH (%) and impulse, Nm.s/BW × BH (%)) were determined. Other measures included frontal plane hip, pelvis and trunk kinematics, walking speed and peak isometric hip abductor strength. Variables were compared according to pain severity using linear models and biomechanical variables were examined. Participants with moderate pain had a significantly higher second peak hip adduction moment and impulse compared to those with less pain. There was no difference in any measure of hip adduction moment between those with mild pain and no pain. There were no differences in kinematics across pain severity categories. Participants with moderate pain had a significantly slower walking speed compared to participants with mild and no pain. Participants with moderate pain had weaker peak isometric hip abductor strength compared to those with mild pain and no pain. The hip adduction moment during walking, hip abduction strength and walking speed differs according to pain severity during walking in people with hip OA. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 36:1637-1644, 2018.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".