Natural History of Knee Osteoarthritis and Risk for Arthroplasty: A 5-Year Follow-up Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: To identify associating risk factors to total knee arthroplasty and to follow-up pain and function for up to 5 years after completing initial comprehensive rehabilitation. Design: Naturalistic, observational cohort study with exploratory analyses of the impact of knee arthroplasty. Rehabilitation lasting 3 to 6 weeks was provided for 205 patients in a rehabilitation clinic setting. The main outcome measures were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Short Form 36 Health Survey. Results: At group level, knee pain and function in patients without arthroplasty remained overall stable from mean=50.6, resp. 51.8 points at baseline to 53.3, resp. 52.7 points at the 5-year follow-up on the WOMAC (scale 0-100). In the course of knee osteoarthritis, 23.4% (n=48) of the patients significantly deteriorated in pain and function and was referred for knee arthroplasty. Total knee arthroplasty was associated with female sex (odds ratio=3.04), educated at university level (odds ratio=3.25), minus 1 comorbidity (odds ratio=1.41), and a decrease of 10 (of 100 possible) points on the WOMAC factor ascending/descending stairs (odds ratio=1.51). Conclusions: Highly educated women with a lower number of comorbidities and higher disability to manage stairs were more likely to receive total knee arthroplasty. Keywords Knee osteoarthritis; Rehabilitation; Arthroplasty; Knee replacement
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".