Association of obesity with the lower limbs osteoarthritis in a community of women from El Jadida Province in Morocco
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In the last years, obesity became of interest because of its association with osteoarthritis (OA) which is increasing with the increase of both life expectancy and the prevalence of obesity. Aims: The objective was to assess the association of obesity with the susceptibility of the lower limbs OA (LLOA) occurrence in women. Subjects and Methods: The symptomatic susceptibility of the onset of LLOA was evaluated on a sample of women from El Jadida (Morocco) using the Moroccan version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) for the lower limbs. Sociodemographic and anthropometric data were collected too using a questionnaire. Results: The surveyed female population was 45±13 years old mostly obese (77%) with an average BMI: 29.18 ± 5.29 and a WHR: 0.93 ± 0.9. The susceptibility of the LLOA in both forms (knee and coccyx osteoarthritis) was highly prevalent in women older than 50 years (22%). The three dimensions of WOMAC (pain, stiffness and functional impairment) are felt much more among postmenopausal 44.37±26.67 (with a rate of 49%) than procreating women 29.58±22.44 (with a rate of 51%) among women with morbid obesity (69.40±8.27) than normal weight (31.67±4.40) and in women having android (86.13%) than those with a gynoid obesity morphotype (5.10%). Conclusions: The results report an association of obesity with the risk of osteoarthritis occurrence varying with age and OA location hence the importance of preventing osteoarthritis issues through the management of obesity. Keywords: Knee osteoarthritis, Coccyx osteoarthritis, WOMAC, Obesity, BMI, WHR.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".