Body Composition Is Associated With Physical Performance in Individuals With Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to determine associations between body composition, self-reported function, and physical performance after accounting for body mass index (BMI) in individuals with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Percent fat and lean mass were evaluated using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Self-reported function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC] function subscale) and physical performance (20-m walk, chair stand, and stair climb) were collected on 46 adults (30% male; BMI, 29.6 ± 3.8 kg/m) with radiographically defined knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grades 2-4). Linear regressions determined the unique association between WOMAC and physical performance explained individually by percent fat and lean mass ([INCREMENT]R) after accounting for BMI. RESULTS: Lower percent fat mass significantly associated with better physical performance after accounting for BMI (20-m walk: [INCREMENT]R = 0.10, p = 0.03; chair stand: [INCREMENT]R = 0.16, p = 0.01; stair climb: [INCREMENT]R = 0.11, p = 0.03). Higher percent lean mass significantly associated with better chair stand ([INCREMENT]R = 0.09, p = 0.04) but not 20-m walk or stair climb ([INCREMENT]R range, 0.04-0.07, p > 0.05). After accounting for BMI, neither percent fat nor lean mass associated with WOMAC. Body mass index did not significantly associate with WOMAC or physical performance. CONCLUSIONS: Lower percent fat and higher percent lean mass associated with better physical performance after accounting for BMI. Body composition and BMI may be used together in the future to more comprehensively understand the association between obesity and disability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".