MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310496873 · doi:10.1186/s12891-022-06012-2

Validity of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) recommended performance-based tests of physical function in individuals with symptomatic Kellgren and Lawrence grade 0–2 knee osteoarthritis

2022· article· en· W4310496873 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Si-Huei Lee, Chi-Chun Kao, Huey‐Wen Liang, Hung-Ta Hondar Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Taiwan UniversityNational Taiwan University Hospital
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyOsteoarthritisWOMACTest (biology)Discriminant validityTimed Up and Go testLogistic regressionReceiver operating characteristicPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychometricsClinical psychologyInternal medicinePathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Performance-based physical tests have been widely used as objective assessments for individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and the core set of tests recommended by the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) aims to provide reliable, valid, feasible and standardized measures for clinical application. However, few studies have documented their validity in roentgenographically mild KOA. Our goal was to test the validity of five performance-based tests in symptomatic KOA patients with X-ray findings of Kellgren and Lawrence (K-L) grade 0-2. METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of thirty KOA patients from outpatient clinics and 30 age- and sex-matched asymptomatic controls from the community. They performed five OARSI-recommended physical tests and the KOA group answered the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index. The tests included the 9-step stair-climbing test (9 s-SCT), timed up and go (TUG) test, 30-second chair-stand test (30sCST), 40-m fast walking-test (40MFPW) and 6-minute walking test (6MWT). The discriminant validity of these physical tests were assessed by comparisons between the KOA and control groups, receiver operating curve and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The convergent/divergent validity was assessed by correlation between the physical tests results and the three subscale scores of the WOMAC in the KOA group. RESULTS: The KOA group had significantly worse performance than the control group. The percentage of difference was the largest in the 9 s-SCT (57.2%) and TUG tests (38.4%). Meanwhile, Cohen's d was above 1.2 for the TUG test and 6MWT (1.2 ~ 2.0), and between 0.8 and 1.2 for the other tests. The areas under the curve to discriminate the two groups were mostly excellent to outstanding, except for the 30sCST. Convergent validity was documented with a moderate correlation between the 9 s-SCT and the physical function (WOMAC-PF) subscale scores (Spearman's ρ = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: The OARSI recommended core set was generally highly discriminative between people with K-L grade 0-2 KOA and their controls, but convergent/divergent validity was observed only in the 9 s-SCT. Further studies are required to evaluate the responsiveness of these tests and understand the discordance of physical performance and self-reported measures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

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

Citations24
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207