Kinesiophobia in Systemic Sclerosis: Relationship With Functional Status, Pulmonary Fibrosis, Depression, and Other Clinical Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the levels of kinesiophobia and its relationship with functional status, quality of life, pulmonary involvement, depression, and other clinical parameters of the disease in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Methods: A total of 100 individuals (40 patients with SSc and 60 healthy controls) were included in the study. The Tampa scale was used to assess kinesiophobia. Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) was used to assess depression. Scleroderma Health Assessment Questionnaire (SSc-HAQ) was used to assess functional status. Modified Rodnan skin score was used to assess skin thickness, and high-resolution computed tomography was used to assess lung fibrosis. Results: The mean Tampa kinesiophobia score was significantly higher in patients with SSc compared to healthy controls. Depressive symptoms were present in 57.5% of patients with SSc. Disease duration, pain, fatigue, disease activity, functional status, pulmonary fibrosis, and depressive symptoms were correlated with kinesiophobia in patients with SSc. Conclusion: There is an increased prevalence of kinesiophobia in patients with SSc, which seems to be more closely associated with disease duration, pain levels, and depressive symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".