Estimation of difficulty in physical functioning observed in elderly women with knee pain by measuring the intercondylar distance of the femurs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and purpose Knee pain is prevalent in elderly women and it increases with age. Simple screening methods to identify individuals with certain disabilities among elderly women with knee pain will be useful in community health activities. The purpose of this study was to determine a cutoff value of the intercondylar distance of the femurs to estimate the presence of some difficulty in physical functioning observed in elderly women with knee pain. Methods Twenty-one elderly women (age 70.0 ± 6.1 years [mean ± SD]) with knee pain were our study subjects. The degree of difficulty in physical functioning was assessed by the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The functioning score, WOMAC-F, consisted of 17 items (possible range, 0－68). Intercondylar distance of the femurs was defined as the maximal diameter, in centimeters, of a wooden stick (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 cm) or 2 or more sticks combined that could pass through the gap between the femurs without getting caught. The sensitivity and specificity of each distance was judged by considering WOMAC-F 4 as positive and WOMAC-F 0－3 as negative. Findings The most suitable cutoff points were 2.5 cm and 3.0 cm. Conclusions Evaluation of the intercondylar distance by using the reference value determined in the present study will be useful in community health activities for screening elderly women with knee pain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".