Factors Associated With Functional Decline in Hand and Hip/Knee Osteoarthritis After One Year: Data From a Population‐Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate factors that together with hand or hip/knee osteoarthritis (OA) could contribute to functional decline over a year's time in elderly individuals. METHODS: The data of 1,886 individuals between ages 65 and 85 years in a prospective, observational population-based study with 12-18 months of follow-up in the context of the European Project on Osteoarthritis were analyzed. The outcome measures were self-reported hand and hip/knee functional decline, evaluated using a minimum clinically important difference of 4 on the Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index and of 2 on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index hip/knee physical function subscales, both normalized to 0-100. Using regression models adjusted for sex, age, country, and education level, the baseline factors considered were clinical hand or hip/knee OA, pain, analgesic/antiinflammatory medications, comorbidities, social isolation, income, walking time, grip strength, physical activity time, and medical/social care. RESULTS: After a year, 453 participants were identified as having worse hand functionality and 1,389 as not worse. Hand OA, anxiety, walking time, and grip strength were risk factors for hand functional decline; pain was a confounder of the effect of hand OA. Analgesic/antiinflammatory medications mediated the combined effect of hip/knee OA plus pain on functional decline in the 554 individuals classified as having worse hip/knee functionality and the 1,291 persons who were not worse. Peripheral artery disease, obesity, and cognitive impairment were other baseline risk factors. CONCLUSION: Study findings showed that together with emotional status and chronic physical and cognitive conditions, OA affects hand and hip/knee functional decline.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".