MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ultrasonography findings in knee osteoarthritis: a prospective observational cross-sectional study of 100 Patients

2020· article· en· W3120861825 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Letícia Naomi Nakada, Felipe Ricardo Aquino dos Santos, Cláudia Andréia Rabay Pimentel Abicalaf, Marta Imamura, Linamara Rizzo Battistella

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Medicina · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisPopliteal cystVisual analogue scaleEnthesopathyPhysical therapyCross-sectional studyJoint effusionBursitisKnee painEffusionUltrasonographyKnee JointInternal medicineArthritisSurgeryRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Worldwide, knee osteoarthritis (KOA) accounts for 2.2% of total years lived with disability. There is low correlation between joint tissue damage and pain intensity. Periarticular structures may be involved and cannot be identified in X-rays. Objectives: To describe the main ultrasonography (USG) changes in symptomatic patients with primary KOA; to correlate number of USG findings with KOA severity assessed by Kellgren and Lawrence (K&L) radiological scores, with pain intensity measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and with functioning scores assessed with Timed up and go test (TUG) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) questionnaire. Methods: 100 patients with primary symptomatic KOA were assessed with X-ray and USG. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were evaluated in a systematic manner. Results: The most frequent findings were joint effusion, pes anserinus bursitis, quadriceps tendon enthesopathy, popliteal cyst, iliotibial band tendinitis and patellar tendinitis. Pearson’s correlation analysis demonstrated a significant moderate positive association between VAS scores and number of USG findings (r=0.36; p<0.0001). The number of USG findings was different between K&L grades I and III (p=0.041), I and IV (p<0.001), and II and IV (p=0.001, ANOVA with Bonferroni correction). There was significant association between number of USG findings and TUG (r=0.18; p=0.014) and WOMAC scores for pain (r=0.16; p<0.029) and physical function domains (r=0.16; p<0.028). Conclusion: The most frequent USG finding was joint effusion. Periarticular structures should be explored as potential sources of pain and disability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de MedicinaSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207