Responsiveness and minimal clinically important changes of common patient-reported and performance-based outcome measures of physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We investigate and compare responsiveness of the physical function subscales of patient-reported measures of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and performance-based measures of the timed up-and-go test and 6-min walk test and determine the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) values in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients following physiotherapy intervention. METHODS: One hundred patients were asked to complete the WOMAC and OKS and to perform the timed up-and-go test and 6-min walk test once pre-intervention and again after 4-week physiotherapy intervention (post-intervention). Responsiveness was determined by correlation analysis and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. RESULTS: The WOMAC-physical function subscale (WOMAC-PF), OKS-functional component score (OKS-FCS), timed up-and-go test, and 6-min walk test showed moderate-to-good relationships with the patients' global rating scale (Spearman correlation ranges = 0.51-0.56). All outcome measures of physical function showed the area under the curve (AUC) >0.70 (AUC ranges = 0.78-0.82). The MCIC values were 12.5 points for WOMAC-PF, 17.5 points for OKS-FCS, 2.82 s for timed up-and-go test, 61 m for 6-min walk test. CONCLUSIONS: All outcome measures have adequate responsiveness to detect clinical improvements over time in functional status following the physiotherapy intervention in patients with knee OA. The MCIC values can help clinicians and researchers to make a decision based on the clinical significance of improvements in patients' functional status.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".