MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046330135 · doi:10.1002/acr.24400

Associations Between Cadence and Knee Loading in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

2020· article· en· W3046330135 on OpenAlexaff
Harvi F. Hart, Trevor B. Birmingham, Codie A. Primeau, Ryan Pinto, Kristyn M. Leitch, J. Robert Giffin

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadenceMedicineOsteoarthritisPreferred walking speedTrunkGait analysisKnee JointGaitPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyOrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that higher walking cadence is associated with lower knee loading, while controlling for walking speed, in patients with medial compartment tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A total of 691 patients underwent quantitative gait analysis, including 3-dimensional knee moments and temporospatial parameters. Using multivariate linear regression, we tested the association of walking cadence with the knee adduction moment angular impulse (a surrogate measure of medial knee compartment load throughout the stance), while controlling for walking speed. We repeated the analysis while also adjusting for sex, age, body mass index, radiographic OA, knee pain, lateral trunk lean, foot progression angle, and mechanical axis angle, and while replacing the knee adduction moment angular impulse with other surrogate measures of knee loading. RESULTS: While controlling for walking speed, we found that a lower cadence was associated with higher knee adduction moment angular impulse (standardized β = -0.396, P < 0.001), suggesting a 0.02% body weight × height × seconds (%BW × Ht × s) decrease in impulse for each step per minute increase in cadence (unstandardized β -0.020 %BW × Ht × s [95% confidence interval -0.027, -0.015]), and remained consistent after adjusting for covariates. A lower cadence was also associated with higher first (standardized β = -0.138, P = 0.010) and second peak knee adduction moment (standardized β = -0.132, P = 0.018), higher peak knee flexion moment (standardized β = -0.128, P = 0.049), and vertical ground reaction force (standardized β = -0.116, P = 0.035) in the adjusted analyses. CONCLUSION: When controlling for walking speed, we found that a lower cadence is associated with higher knee loading per step in patients with medial tibiofemoral OA. Future research should investigate the potential beneficial biomechanical and clinical effects of increasing walking cadence in patients with knee OA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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