MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117535432 · doi:10.1177/1947603520980157

Longitudinal Change in Knee Cartilage Thickness and Function in Subjects with and without MRI-Diagnosed Cartilage Damage

2020· article· en· W3117535432 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Wisser, Andreas Lapper, Frank W. Roemer, David Fuerst, S. Maschek, W. Wirth, Georg N. Duda, F. Eckstein

Bibliographic record

VenueCartilage · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungGlaxoSmithKlineNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationPfizerFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsCartilageMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACMagnetic resonance imagingKnee cartilageBody mass indexCartilage damagePopulationInternal medicineRadiologyAnatomyArticular cartilagePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Cartilage damage diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is highly prevalent in the population. In this article, we explore whether such cartilage damage is associated with greater longitudinal change in 3D cartilage thickness and knee function in subjects without (risk factors of) knee osteoarthritis. Design Eighty-two knees of Osteoarthritis Initiative healthy reference cohort participants had baseline and 4-year follow-up MRI and knee function data. Baseline presence of semiquantitatively assessed MRI-based cartilage damage (MOAKS [MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score] ≥ grade 1.0) was recorded by an experienced radiologist. Longitudinal femorotibial cartilage thickness change was determined after segmentation, using location-independent methodology. Knee function was evaluated by patient-reported outcomes and functional performance measures. Statistical comparisons included analysis of covariance adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index. Results Forty-five percent of the participants had cartilage damage in at least one femorotibial subregion; the cartilage thickness change score was 15% greater in participants with than in those without damage (1216 ± 434 vs. 1058 ± 277 µm). This difference reached borderline statistical significance with and without adjustment for age, sex, and body mass index ( P = 0.05). No significant differences in the change of patient-reported outcomes of knee function (PASE [physical activity score of the elderly] and WOMAC [Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index]) or chair stand test results were detected. Of those without femorotibial damage, 58% had cartilage damage in at least one femoropatellar subregion; these had a 9% greater femorotibial cartilage change score than those without femoropatellar or femorotibial damage (difference not statistically significant). Conclusions In the absence of osteoarthritis risk factors, semiquantitatively assessed MRI-based cartilage damage appears to be associated with greater longitudinal location-independent femorotibial cartilage thickness changes, but not with greater functional deteriorations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartilageSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207