Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Knee Function: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A plethora of instruments have been developed to assess function in patients with knee problems.These measurements have focused on patient-reported measures from the patient's perspective rather than clinician-based measures because of superior validity [1].Grounded in the psychometric properties such as reliability, validity, and responsiveness, recommended patient-reported measures include the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WO-MAC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Cincinnati Knee Rating System, Activity Rating Scale, Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale, and Oxford Knee Score [1,2].The IKDC Subjective Knee Form, in particular, was instituted to standardize international documentation of the evaluation after knee surgery or treatment and has strengths in being responsive to change in surgical interventions [2,3].The WOMAC, initially developed in 1982, was designed to evaluate the progression of disease or efficacy of treatments in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA).It comprises three domains: pain severity during various positions or movements, severity of joint stiffness, and difficulty performing daily functional activities, with 5, 2, and 17 items, respectively.The Likert version is rated on 5 levels, with scores ranging from 0 ("none") to 4 ("extreme").Cumulative scores for each domain range from 0-20 for pain, 0-8 for stiffness, and 0-68 for physical function, with higher scores indicating a more severe condition.Self-administered or interview-administered questionnaire takes 5-10 minutes [4,5].Its psychometric evidence is sufficiently reliable and valid for use in clinical and research setting [1,2,4].A Korean version of the WOM-AC has been authenticated for reliability, validity, and responsiveness [6].Notably, items from the three WOMAC sub-types are incorporated into the KOOS.The KOOS, developed based on the WOMAC, offers patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate both short and long-term outcomes.Suitable for assessing knee injuries and/or OA across various age groups, it also gauges the course of the disease and the effect of treatments, interventions, and surgeries [7].The self-administered KOOS evaluates 5 domains: Pain (9 items); other Symptoms (7 items); Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (17 items); Sport and Recreation function (5 items); and knee-related Quality of Life (4 items) [8].The KOOS, added to Domains from WOMAC, has been shown in previous studies to be more responsive and sen- Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Knee Function -Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".