Is There a Relationship Between Kinesiophobia and Physical Activity Level in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the levels of kinesiophobia, physical activity, depression, disability, and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING: A tertiary health care center. SUBJECTS: Ninety-six patients with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Pain intensity was evaluated by the Visual Analog Scale, kinesiophobia by the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and Brief Fear of Movement Scale, depression by the Beck Depression Inventory, disability by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, physical activity level by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire short form, and quality of life by the Short Form 12 Health Survey Questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the patients, 85.7% had high-level kinesiophobia, 70.6% had depression, and 64.4% had low, 27.8% moderate, and 7.8% high physical activity levels. Age, activity-related pain score of the Visual Analog Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and Brief Fear of Movement Scale scores, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and Beck Depression Inventory scores were higher in the group with high-level kinesiophobia, whereas the mental, physical, and total scores obtained from the Short Form 12 Health Survey Questionnaire were higher in the group with low-level kinesiophobia (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: As the treatment of pain alone in patients with knee osteoarthritis is not sufficient to reduce fear of movement, we suggest that approaches to increase awareness of fear of movement and physical activity and cognitive behavioral therapy related to fear of movement should be included in the treatment program.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".