AVALIAÇÃO DA DOR E FUNÇÃO EM IDOSOS OBESOS COM OSTEOARTROSE EM JOELHO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este estudo apresentou como objetivos avaliar a dor, funcionalidade e o Indice de Massa Corporea e relacionar a obesidade com a dor e com a funcionalidade em idosos com osteoartrose de joelho. Estudo do tipo quantitativo, transversal, descritivo, analitico que teve como participantes 20 idosos pacientes de uma Clinica Escola de Fisioterapia localizada no interior da Bahia, com diagnostico medico de osteoartrose em joelho. Os instrumentos empregados foram: questionario sociobiodemografico, avaliacao do indice de massa corporal (IMC) e o Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Os resultados mostraram que 20 (100%) dos participantes eram do sexo feminino, 12 (60%) estavam na faixa etaria entre 60 a 70 anos, 19 (95%) eram obeso, 9 (45%) apresentaram dor intensa, 9 (45%) tinham rigidez leve e 8 (40%) exibiram atividade fisica comprometida de maneira moderada. A relacao do grau de Indice de Massa Corporea com a dor mostrou que 9(45%) dos idosos obesos tinham dor intensa e a relacao do grau de obesidade com dificuldade de realizar atividade fisica mostrou que 7 (40%) idosos obesos apresentaram dificuldade intensa para realizar tais atividades. Constatou-se que os idosos com osteoartrose de joelho associada a obesidade apresentaram niveis altos de dor e dificuldade de executar atividades funcionais da vida diaria sendo indicado um tratamento interdisciplinar visando a perda de peso, o fortalecimento muscular, a diminuicao da dor e ganho na funcionalidade.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".