A case-series of patients with musculoskeletal conditions in an underserved community in Moca, Dominican Republic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe characteristics and activity limitations of new patients with musculoskeletal conditions presenting to the World Spine Care (WSC) clinic located in the underserved community of Moca, Dominican Republic. METHODS: We conducted a prospective case series of consecutive adults between October 12 and December 5, 2015. A survey of valid and reliable measures including: Body pain diagram, Wong-Baker FACES® pain rating scale, Spine Functional Index (SFI), Lower Limb Functional Index (LLFI), Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI) and the 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12v2) was administered to collect socio-demographics, expectation of recovery, comorbidities, and self-reported health status data. RESULTS: Forty-two patients (23 females and 19 males) were included. The most common primary complaint was lower back pain (40.5%; 17/42) and 57% (24/42) of individuals reported pain that interfered with their ability to function and engage in daily activities. Half of the patients presented with two complaints. Complaints were similar between genders. Most patients (64%; 27/42) reported chronic pain (> 6 months) and 97% (41/42) reported believing that they would recover. Twenty-one percent (9/42) self-reported being diagnosed with depression and/or anxiety at some point in their life. In addition, most (57%; 24/42) individuals reported below average physical and mental health related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to describe characteristics of patients seeking care at the WSC clinic in Moca, Dominican Republic. Most patients attending the clinic suffer from persistent spine complaints that interfere with their ability to function and engage in daily activities. Nevertheless, the patients have positive expectations of recovery.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".