MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040159031 · doi:10.1002/acr.24366

Understanding the Association Between Osteoarthritis and Social Participation: The Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

2020· article· en· W3040159031 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anthony V. Perruccio, Calvin Yip, J. Denise Power, Mayilée Cañizares, Monique A. M. Gignac, Elizabeth M. Badley

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSocial engagementReceiptMedicineAssociation (psychology)Longitudinal studySocial supportGerontologyPsychologyDemographyClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The focus on disability in osteoarthritis (OA) has largely been on the ability to perform specific activities, which neglects the greater implications for social participation. We investigated the association between OA and social participation, considering activity limitations and instrumental supports as intervening variables in the association. METHODS: Data were from 21,214 respondents, ages 45-85 years, from cycle 1 of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. The questionnaire elicited information regarding self-reported doctor-diagnosed OA, difficulty with 14 activities, perceived availability and receipt of instrumental supports, and 17 social participation activities. Structural equation modeling was used. The primary outcome was social participation, and the primary predictor was OA. The intervening variables included activity limitations, received instrumental supports, and perceived instrumental supports. Latent variables were developed for intervening and social participation variables. The covariates included age, sex, body mass index, income, education, smoking, and comorbidity count. RESULTS: The mean age of the respondents was 63 years, 51% were female, and 26.5% reported having OA. Two distinct social participation indicators were identified, including social participation-diversity and social participation-intensity. When intervening variables were not considered, minimal/no association was found between OA and social participation. When intervening variables were considered, unique pathways linking OA and social participation were found. The overall negative association between activity limitations and social participation was partially direct and partially buffered by both receipt of and perceived availability of instrumental supports. In the absence of activity limitations, OA was associated with greater social participation. CONCLUSION: Enhanced social participation in people with OA who do not have activity limitations may reflect proactive steps taken by those with mild OA to maintain activity and social engagement. For those with activity limitations, findings highlight the need for interventions to mitigate limitations and draw particular attention to the importance of both provision and awareness of available instrumental supports in maintaining social participation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.292
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.111 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207