Heel pain in female patients with early knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Multiple lower limb joint involvement is one of the most common and debilitating musculoskeletal conditions, while the complaints from both heel and knee pain are considered the most frequent. For that reason, in this cross-sectional study, the association between heel pain (HP) and early knee osteoarthritis (EKOA) was investigated; the most painful site and side of HP, the prevalence, and risk factors for disabling HP in patients with EKOA were identified. Results Bilateral HP (56%) and posterior HP (54%) were found to be the most prevalent complaints, and 66% of patients reported the HP to be non-disabling. There was a very high positive statistically significant correlation between the Manchester Foot Pain Disability Index (MFPDI) and both the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the total Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) score (p ≤ 0.001), while there was a high negative statistically significant correlation between MFPDI and quadriceps angle of the most affected knee (p = 0.002). A higher total WOMAC score (OR 1.077, 95% CI 1.014 to 1.145) significantly increases the risk of developing disabling HP, while wearing 2–3-cm heels during the past month was found to be protective against the development of disabling HP (odds ratio < 1). Conclusion Disabling HP was present in a third of patients with EKOA and HP, and it was associated with flat shoe wear as well as a high total WOMAC score. Also, it had a statistically significant correlation with varus knee mal-alignment. Furthermore, decreased functional ability in the presence of HP was found to lead to significant disability. Moreover, a striking finding in this study was the longer mean duration of HP compared to the duration of knee 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.209 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".