Comparison of joint hypermobility in general and orthopaedic clinic population in south India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Generalised joint hypermobility (GJH) is associated with musculoskeletal symptoms. Beighton score is universally used to measure hypermobility and the cut off score of ≥4 is quoted in literature to define GJH. No data exists on the prevalence of GJH in patients attending orthopaedic outpatients in India. Materials and methods: The objective of this study was to compare the prevalence of GJH in the general versus orthopaedic patients. 406 patients attending a wellness clinic and 1780 patients attending orthopaedic outpatient clinic in a large private hospital in south India were scored for hypermobility using Beighton score. The mean age of the cohorts attending the wellness clinic and orthopaedic clinic was 33.47± 11.63 years and 36.37± 9.36 years respectively. There were more males than females recruited in the orthopaedic clinic. Results: The wellness group had significantly higher numbers in the 20 to 39 year age range compared to the orthopaedic group (p value <0.00001). There was a significantly higher proportion of zero Beighton score in the orthopaedic group (p value <0.00001). The proportion of people with Beighton score 4-9 in the wellness and orthopaedic groups were 33% and 3.3% respectively. The proportion of GJH with Beighton score 5-9 was 16% and 2% in the wellness and orthopaedic groups respectively. Conclusions: This is the only study, to the best of our knowledge, to have attempted to compare GJH prevalence in orthopaedic patients with a control group. The prevalence of GJH is significantly higher in the general population than the orthopaedic out-patients. Beighton score is simple to perform and must be included in the management of every orthopaedic patient.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".