Risk Factors for Depression in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a widespread chronic condition. Depression frequently occurs among patients with KOA. The objective of this meta-analysis was to identify risk factors associated with comorbid depression in patients with KOA. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was conducted for studies related to comorbid depression in patients with KOA. We conducted statistical analyses to obtain relevant results, followed by heterogeneity tests and assessment for publication bias. Results: The prevalence of comorbid depression among patients with KOA was 34% (95% CI, 28%–41%). Notable risk factors linked to comorbid depression in patients with KOA included female sex (relative risk [RR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.11–1.23), obesity (mean difference [MD], 1.30; 95% CI, 0.88–1.71), use of analgesics (RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.38–1.63), comorbidities (MD, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.10–0.31), unmarried or widowed status (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.56–1.91), bilateral knee pain (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11–1.71), high total Western Ontario and Mc-Master Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score (MD, 14.92; 95% CI, 10.02–19.82), high WOMAC pain score (MD, 5.76; 95% CI, 2.86–8.67), low gait velocity (MD, −0.12; 95% CI, −0.16 to −0.09), and extended duration in the Timed Up and Go Test (MD, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.87–2.25). Conclusion: Based on the current evidence, female sex, obesity, use of analgesics, comorbidities, unmarried or widowed status, bilateral knee pain, high total WOMAC score, high WOMAC pain score, low gait velocity, and prolonged time on the Timed Up and Go Test were identified as risk factors for depression in patients with KOA. Focus should be given to these aspects when preventing depression among these patients. [ Orthopedics . 2024;47(5):e225–e232.]
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 | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".