OMERACT/OARSI initiative to define states of severity and indication for joint replacement in hip and knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE \n \nTime to theoretical indication of joint replacement surgery has been proposed as a primary outcome for potential structure-modifying interventions for osteoarthritis (OA). The objectives of this OMERACT/OARSI Working Group were to identify pain, physical function, and structure states that represent the progression from early to late disease for individuals with OA of the hip and knee, and to create a composite measure of these 3 domains to define states of OA severity and a surrogate measure of "need for joint replacement surgery." \n \n \nMETHODS \n \nFor pain, focus groups and one-on-one interviews were used. For function, Rasch analysis was performed on existing indices the Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), each of which subsumes the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questions. For structure, a comparison of existing indices (Kellgren-Lawrence, OARSI stages, and joint space width) was performed for the hip and the knee. \n \n \nRESULTS \n \nFor pain, key features of pain that are most distressing to people with OA from early to late disease were identified. For function, the reduction of the number of items based on the existing indices continues. For structure, the analysis is also ongoing. \n \n \nCONCLUSION \n \nPreliminary results were presented at OMERACT 8; the final objective will be to combine the 3 domains (pain, function, and structure) and to create a composite index that could define states of severity and "need for total joint replacement," which could be used to evaluate treatment response to disease-modifying drugs in OA clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".