MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411255879 · doi:10.7189/jogh.15.04173

Association between physical activity and knee osteoarthritis: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4411255879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaofeng Cui, Fangfang Xie, Jian Cui, Yukui Tian, Xue Bai, Junchang Liu, Fei Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisOsteoarthritisMedicineAssociation (psychology)MEDLINESystematic reviewPhysical activityPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicinePsychologyInternal medicineBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA), a debilitating chronic degenerative joint disease, substantially compromises patients' functional capacity and quality of life. Although physical activity (PA) has been recognised as a modifiable risk factor in the development of KOA, its potential protective role remains debated. To clarify this clinical uncertainty, we conducted a rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the association between PA levels and the risk of incident KOA. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science databases for published observational studies on the association between PA and knee osteoarthritis. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we selected English literature from inception to publication on 21 September 2024, and assessed study quality according to the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Our protocol is available on PROSPERO. Results: Our systematic screening identified 14 eligible observational studies (13 cohort studies and one case-control study) involving 507 696 participants with 27 412 incident cases of KOA. A pooled analysis comparing levels of PA intensity showed a 26% increased risk of knee OA for high PA compared with moderate PA (relative risk (RR) = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.17-1.37). In contrast, neither high PA (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.84-1.23) nor moderate PA (RR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.84-1.05) showed protective effects compared with low PA reference groups. Stratified analyses showed nonsignificant associations in cohort studies (RR = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.87-1.29) compared with case-control studies (RR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.20-0.83). Notably, regional subgroup analyses showed comparable PA-related risks between European (RR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.74-1.38) and North American populations (RR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.81-1.31). Crucially, gender-stratified analyses demonstrated no significant differential risk in males (RR = 1.20; 95% CI = 0.54-2.70) vs. females (RR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.29-1.82). Conclusions: This systematic review comprehensively demonstrated a dose-dependent relationship between physical activity intensity and the risk of knee osteoarthritis. Our meta-analysis showed that high PA levels significantly increased the risk of knee osteoarthritis compared with moderate PA. In addition, limited evidence suggested that exceeding international PA guidelines may increase the risk of osteoarthritis (RR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.02-1.35). However, future studies need to be executed to further define the type of activity, optimal dose and duration required to effectively reduce the risk of knee osteoarthritis. Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42024600175.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.003
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.350 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global HealthSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207