Thresholds in the Relationship of Quadriceps Strength With Functional Limitations in Women With Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate thresholds of strength below which individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA) may have more difficulty carrying out physical functions of daily life. Individuals below such thresholds might benefit more from strengthening interventions than those with greater strength. METHODS: We studied individuals with symptomatic OA at baseline in the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study who had knee extensor strength measured isokinetically at 60º/second. Participants underwent a 20-meter walk test and a sit-to-stand test and answered questions from the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Physical function results were plotted against measures of quadriceps strength (Nm) (and as strength:body weight) for the worst knee. Loess technique was used to examine inflection points. Nonlinear relationships were examined in piecewise linear regression models. Differences were tested using linear and logistic regression models. RESULTS: The study had 834 participants (65.8% women). The mean ± SD age of the participants was 62.9 ± 7.9 years. In women, there were thresholds of strength below which the slope of strength versus function was steeper: walking speed (<58 Nm), chair stand time (<32 Nm), and the McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index functions of rising from a chair and getting on/off the toilet (<38 Nm). We found no thresholds in men. Loess analyses using strength:weight showed similar results. CONCLUSION: In individuals with symptomatic knee OA, thresholds in the strength function relationship may help identify individuals, especially women, at the brink of disability insofar as strength and capacity for daily tasks. In those with low strength, small increments in strength may be associated with improvement in function and greater ease with common daily life, emphasizing the importance of preventing loss of strength.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".