ArticleClinical rheumatology2019
Performance of distinct knee osteoarthritis classification criteria in the ELSA-Brasil musculoskeletal study.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing Osteoarthritis Pain in Underrepresented Populations: Insights from Mexico and Latin America.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Clinical Criteria for the Diagnosis of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes.Arthritis care & research · 2025Article
- The Knee-SCHOOL: a brief patient-centered multidisciplinary educational program for knee osteoarthritis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Assessing the burden of osteoarthritis in Latin America: a rapid evidence assessment.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Review
- Development of a convolutional neural network for diagnosing osteoarthritis, trained with knee radiographs from the ELSA-Brasil Musculoskeletal.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the performance of different knee osteoarthritis (OA) classification criteria in a subsample of subjects of ELSA-Brasil Musculoskeletal cohort (ELSA-Brasil MSK) in comparison with the clinical-radiographic evaluation of an experienced rheumatologist.
methodA cross-sectional study of the diagnostic accuracy of different knee OA classification criteria: radiographic OA, symptomatic OA, clinical and clinical-radiographic criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and the definition proposed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), UK. The study also evaluated some alternative definitions of OA including a combination of criteria. In total, 250 subjects participated. Only one knee per subject was included. When both or none of the knees were affected, one knee was randomly selected for analysis. OA prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were presented (CI 95%; α = 5%).
resultsThe mean age was 56.1 years (SD = 8.7), 48.8% female, and 39.2% presented knee OA according to the rheumatologist. The sensitivity and the specificity of radiographic OA were 51% and 96.7%, respectively, while the NICE definition showed 57.0% and 76.3%, respectively. The other OA criteria showed good levels of specificity, but the levels of sensitivity were below 30%. Considering NICE and/or X-ray result in combination, the sensitivity increased (73.4%), while the specificity reduced slightly (73.0%) in relation to the original NICE definition.
conclusionsRadiographic OA showed the best performance, followed by NICE definition, especially in combination with X-ray results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.