{"doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0266964","title":"Biclustering reveals potential knee OA phenotypes in exploratory analyses: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative","abstract":"OBJECTIVE: To apply biclustering, a methodology originally developed for analysis of gene expression data, to simultaneously cluster observations and clinical features to explore candidate phenotypes of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) for the first time. METHODS: Data from the baseline Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) visit were cleaned, transformed, and standardized as indicated (leaving 6461 knees with 86 features). Biclustering produced submatrices of the overall data matrix, representing similar observations across a subset of variables. Statistical validation was determined using the novel SigClust procedure. After identifying biclusters, relationships with key outcome measures were assessed, including progression of radiographic KOA, total knee arthroplasty, loss of joint space width, and worsening Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, over 96 months of follow-up. RESULTS: The final analytic set included 6461 knees from 3330 individuals (mean age 61 years, mean body mass index 28 kg/m2, 57% women and 86% White). We identified 6 mutually exclusive biclusters characterized by different feature profiles at baseline, particularly related to symptoms and function. Biclusters represented overall better (#1), similar (#2, 3, 6), and poorer (#4, 5) prognosis compared to the overall cohort of knees, respectively. In general, knees in biclusters #4 and 5 had more structural progression (based on Kellgren-Lawrence grade, total knee arthroplasty, and loss of joint space width) but tended to have an improvement in WOMAC pain scores over time. In contrast, knees in bicluster #1 had less incident and progressive KOA, fewer total knee arthroplasties, less loss of joint space width, and stable pain scores compared with the overall cohort. SIGNIFICANCE: We identified six biclusters within the baseline OAI dataset which have varying relationships with key outcomes in KOA. Such biclusters represent potential phenotypes within the larger cohort and may suggest subgroups at greater or lesser risk of progression over time.","journal":"PLoS ONE","year":2022,"id":254548,"datarank":0.8439249302923302,"base_score":3.091042453358316,"endowment":3.091042453358316,"self_citation_contribution":0.4636563680037475,"citation_network_contribution":0.3802685622885827,"self_endowment_contribution":0.4636563680037475,"citer_contribution":0.3802685622885827,"corpus_percentile":76.1584280962327,"corpus_rank":3083,"citation_count":21,"citer_count":13,"citers_with_citation_signal":11,"citers_with_endowment":11,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":true,"is_dataset_confidence":0.8336,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":true,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":"2022-01-01","fair_score":25.0,"fair_percentile":40.966065423417916,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":901661,"name":"Thomas H. Keefe","orcid":"0000-0001-5565-1060","position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":528934,"name":"Todd A. Schwartz","orcid":"0000-0002-0232-2543","position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":333486,"name":"Leigh F. Callahan","orcid":"0000-0001-6362-7220","position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":404668,"name":"Richard F. Loeser","orcid":"0000-0003-2832-6144","position":4,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":383773,"name":"Yvonne M. Golightly","orcid":"0000-0003-1205-2759","position":5,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":414465,"name":"Liubov Arbeeva","orcid":"0000-0001-5004-419X","position":6,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":522492,"name":"J. S. Marron","orcid":"0000-0003-2000-1476","position":7,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":331494,"name":"Amanda E. Nelson","orcid":"0000-0002-9344-7877","position":0,"is_corresponding":true}],"reference_count":50,"raw_metadata":null,"created_at":"2026-07-19T00:25:08.518416Z","pmid":"35609053","pmcid":"PMC9129051","fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":72.2222,"fair_a":25.0,"fair_i":20.0,"fair_r":25.0,"fair_zscore":-0.374,"fair_rationale":{"fair_score":25.0,"has_llm":true,"taxonomy_version":"fair_taxonomy_v5","dimensions":{"F":{"name":"Findable","score":72.22,"criteria":[{"key":"f_dataset_pid","label":"Persistent identifier for the data","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"The only PID given (DOI: 10.15154/1519056) identifies the OAI source dataset, not the study's own derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-F1-01D — FAIR Data Maturity Model: 'Data is identified by a persistent identifier' (priorit","RDA-F1-02D — FAIR Data Maturity Model: 'Data is identified by a globally unique identifier'","FsF-F1-02D — F-UJI/FAIRsFAIR: 'Data is assigned a persistent identifier'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"f_repository_named","label":"Named repository","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"All relevant data for this analysis are available at https://nda.nih.gov/study.html?id=911","grounded":true,"rationale":"The repository (NDA) is named as the holder of the data. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-F4-01M — FAIR Data Maturity Model: metadata is offered so it can be harvested and indexed (","NIH DMS Policy Element 4 (NOT-OD-21-014) — name the repository where data will be archived","NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Long-Term Sustainability', 'Reten"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"f_data_availability_statement","label":"Data-availability statement","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"All relevant data for this analysis are available at https://nda.nih.gov/study.html?id=911 , DOI: 10.15154/1519056 . All OAI data are publicly available at: https://data-archive.nimh.nih.gov/oai/ .","grounded":true,"rationale":"The Data Availability Statement points to a repository record with a DOI, corresponding to Colavizza category 3. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["Colavizza, Hrynaszkiewicz, Staden, Whitaker & McGillivray (2020), 'The citation advantage of li","Springer Nature research data policy — Data Availability Statements: standard statement templat","RDA-F3-01M — metadata clearly and explicitly includes the identifier of the data it describes"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"f_discovery_metadata","label":"Description of the dataset as an object","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"S1 Table OAI variable descriptions and key to NDA dataset.","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper provides an itemised inventory of variables in a supplementary table. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-F2-01M — 'Rich metadata is provided to allow discovery' (priority Essential)","FsF-F2-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes descriptive core elements to support data findability'","FsF-R1-01MD — F-UJI: 'Metadata specifies the content of the data'"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"f_dataset_cited","label":"Dataset formally cited","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.5,"verdict":"partial","evidence":"DOI: 10.15154/1519056","grounded":true,"rationale":"The dataset identifier appears only in body text (Data Availability Statement), not in the reference list. [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["FORCE11 Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles (2014) — data should be cited as a first-","RDA-F3-01M — metadata clearly and explicitly includes the identifier of the data it describes","FsF-F3-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes the identifier of the data it describes'"],"scored":true,"signal":null}]},"A":{"name":"Accessible","score":25.0,"criteria":[{"key":"a_data_openly_accessible","label":"Access route free of preconditions","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No route to the study's own derived data is provided; the availability statement only covers the source OAI data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-A1.1-01D — 'Data is accessible through a free access protocol'","FsF-A1-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata contains access level and access conditions of the data'","NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Free and Easy Access'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"a_access_conditions_stated","label":"Access level labelled","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"All OAI data are publicly available","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper labels the data as 'publicly available', which is an explicit access-level label. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["FsF-A1-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata contains access level and access conditions of the data'","RDA-A1-01M — metadata contains information to enable the user to get access to the data","COAR Controlled Vocabularies — Access Rights v1.0 (open / embargoed / restricted / metadata-onl"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"a_controlled_access_for_sensitive","label":"Gatekeeper for sensitive data","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"The study's own data are derived from public OAI data, and no gatekeeper is named for the derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy (NOT-OD-14-124) — controlled-access via a Data Access Committee","RDA-A1.2-01D — 'Data is accessible through an access protocol that supports authentication and ","NIH DMS Policy Element 5 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Access, Distribution, or Reuse Considerations (conse"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"a_timeline_retention","label":"Availability timing & retention","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No sentence addresses the timing or persistence of the study's own derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["NIH DMS Plan Element 4 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Data Preservation, Access, and Associated Timelines","NSTC Desirable Characteristics (2022), Organizational Infrastructure: 'Retention Policy'","RDA-A2-01M — 'Metadata is guaranteed to remain available after data is no longer available'"],"scored":false,"signal":null}]},"I":{"name":"Interoperable","score":20.0,"criteria":[{"key":"i_open_nonproprietary_format","label":"Open file format","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No file format is named for the released data.","anchors":["FsF-R1.3-02D — F-UJI: 'Data is available in a file format recommended by the target research co","RDA-R1.3-02D — data is expressed in a machine-understandable community standard","RDA-I1-01D — data uses a knowledge representation expressed in a standardised format"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"i_community_standard_vocabulary","label":"Community standard / vocabulary","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No community data or metadata standard from FAIRsharing is explicitly named for the data.","anchors":["RDA-R1.3-01M — 'Metadata complies with a community standard' (priority Essential)","RDA-R1.3-01D — 'Data complies with a community standard'","RDA-I2-01M — '(Meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles'"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"i_qualified_references","label":"Identifiers for the resources the data depend on","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"doi: 10.15154/1519056","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper provides a DOI for the OAI data, which is a resource other than the study's own data. [majority verdict 'yes' (4/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-I3-01M — '(meta)data include references to other (meta)data'","RDA-I3-03M — 'metadata includes qualified references to other metadata'","FsF-I3-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes links between the data and its related entities'"],"scored":false,"signal":null}]},"R":{"name":"Reusable","score":25.0,"criteria":[{"key":"r_reuse_license","label":"Reuse licence","kind":"llm","weight":2.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No reuse licence is named for the data; only a generic data use agreement is mentioned without a specific name.","anchors":["RDA-R1.1-01M — 'Metadata includes information about the licence under which the data can be reu","RDA-R1.1-02M — 'Metadata refers to a standard reuse licence'","RDA-R1.1-03M — 'Metadata refers to a machine-understandable reuse licence'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"r_provenance_methods","label":"Provenance of the data","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"SAS version 9.4","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper names a specific software version (SAS 9.4) used for data analysis. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-R1.2-01M — 'Metadata includes provenance information according to community- specific standa","FsF-R1.2-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes provenance information about data creation or generati","W3C PROV-O (W3C Recommendation, 2013) — the entity/activity/agent model of provenance"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"r_documentation_codebook","label":"Documentation / codebook","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No documentation object (README, codebook) is mentioned as accompanying the study's own derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["RDA-R1-01M — '(Meta)data are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attribu","FsF-R1-01MD — F-UJI: 'Metadata specifies the content of the data'","NIH DMS Policy Element 3 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Standards (documentation and metadata to accompany t"],"scored":false,"signal":null},{"key":"r_versioning","label":"Snapshot identified","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No version token or date is provided to identify the snapshot of the data.","anchors":["DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 — the 'Version' property","RDA-R1.2-01M — provenance information (which version was used is provenance)","NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Provenance', 'Retention Policy'"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"x_code_availability","label":"Analysis code available","kind":"llm","weight":1.0,"fraction":0.0,"verdict":"no","evidence":null,"grounded":false,"rationale":"No code availability is mentioned; the paper does not provide a locator for the study's own code.","anchors":["NIH DMS Policy Element 2 (NOT-OD-21-014) — 'Related Tools, Software and/or Code'","FAIR4RS Principles v1.0 (Chue Hong et al., 2022; RDA/FORCE11/ReSA) — FAIR Principles for Resear","FORCE11 Software Citation Principles (Smith, Katz & Niemeyer, 2016, PeerJ CS 2:e86)"],"scored":true,"signal":null},{"key":"x_funding_attribution","label":"Funder and award number","kind":"llm","weight":0.5,"fraction":1.0,"verdict":"yes","evidence":"R21AR074685","grounded":true,"rationale":"The paper provides an award number (R21AR074685) for the funding. [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]","anchors":["DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 — 'FundingReference' property (funderName, funderIdentifier, award","Crossref Funder Registry — canonical funder identifiers for funding metadata","RDA-F2-01M — rich metadata provided to allow discovery (funding is part of the descriptive reco"],"scored":true,"signal":null}]}},"actions":[{"key":"f_dataset_pid","dimension":"F","label":"Persistent identifier for the data","action":"Mint or cite a persistent identifier for the dataset — a repository DOI or an accession from a registered repository — and print it in the paper. A bare URL is not persistent: it is the single most common cause of a dead data link five years after publication. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"The only PID given (DOI: 10.15154/1519056) identifies the OAI source dataset, not the study's own derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"a_data_openly_accessible","dimension":"A","label":"Access route free of preconditions","action":"Remove the precondition or justify it. Release the data at publication with no embargo, no registration wall, and no approval step — NIH's zero-embargo public- access rule (NOT-OD-25-101) has already made 'available at publication' the federal baseline for the article; the data should not lag behind it. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No route to the study's own derived data is provided; the availability statement only covers the source OAI data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"r_reuse_license","dimension":"R","label":"Reuse licence","action":"Attach a standard, machine-readable open licence to the deposit — CC0 or CC BY, which is what Horizon Europe and most funders expect — and print the licence identifier in the paper. 'Free to use' is not a licence: it grants nothing a reuser's institution can rely on.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No reuse licence is named for the data; only a generic data use agreement is mentioned without a specific name.","gain":16.67,"priority":"essential","scored":true},{"key":"i_open_nonproprietary_format","dimension":"I","label":"Open file format","action":"Release the data in an open, community-standard format (CSV/TSV, JSON, HDF5, NetCDF, FASTQ, VCF, NIfTI…) instead of — or alongside — any proprietary or instrument-native format, and name the format in the paper. A dataset that needs a €2,000 licence to open is not reusable.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No file format is named for the released data.","gain":8.33,"priority":"important","scored":true},{"key":"x_code_availability","dimension":"R","label":"Analysis code available","action":"Publish the analysis code in a public forge, archive a tagged release with a DOI (Zenodo/Software Heritage), and cite that DOI in the paper. NIH DMS Element 2 asks for the tools and code, not only the data — and 'available on request' is not a locator. Archive the analysis code in a versioned repository (GitHub + a Zenodo release DOI).","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No code availability is mentioned; the paper does not provide a locator for the study's own code.","gain":8.33,"priority":"important","scored":true},{"key":"f_dataset_cited","dimension":"F","label":"Dataset formally cited","action":"Cite the dataset in the reference list like a publication — creator, year, title, repository, DOI/accession — and cite it in-text where it is used. Only a reference- list entry is machine-readable to Crossref/DataCite, and only a citation lets the data earn credit. Cite the clinical / human-subjects repository accession (e.g. from dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA)) in the reference list.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"partial","current":0.5,"evidence":"DOI: 10.15154/1519056","why":"The dataset identifier appears only in body text (Data Availability Statement), not in the reference list. [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]","gain":4.17,"priority":"important","scored":true},{"key":"r_versioning","dimension":"R","label":"Snapshot identified","action":"Version the deposit and cite the exact version analysed (a version-specific DOI, or an accession with its version suffix). A reader reproducing your work against 'the current release' is reproducing it against a different dataset.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No version token or date is provided to identify the snapshot of the data.","gain":4.17,"priority":"useful","scored":true},{"key":"i_community_standard_vocabulary","dimension":"I","label":"Community standard / vocabulary","action":"Adopt and NAME your domain's data standard — the minimum-information checklist, metadata schema, or ontology your community uses (MIAME/MINSEQE, ISA-Tab, BIDS, an OBO ontology, HL7 FHIR/OMOP) — and say which one you followed. A reporting checklist standardises your paper; it does nothing for your data. In clinical / human-subjects, describe the data with OMOP CDM, CDISC SDTM or HL7 FHIR.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No community data or metadata standard from FAIRsharing is explicitly named for the data.","gain":0.0,"priority":"important","scored":false},{"key":"r_documentation_codebook","dimension":"R","label":"Documentation / codebook","action":"Ship a README and a data dictionary IN the deposit — every file, every variable, its units, its allowed values, its missing-value codes. It is the cheapest single thing that makes a dataset usable by someone who was not in the lab, and a table buried in the article does not travel with the data.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No documentation object (README, codebook) is mentioned as accompanying the study's own derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (2/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"important","scored":false},{"key":"a_controlled_access_for_sensitive","dimension":"A","label":"Gatekeeper for sensitive data","action":"Route sensitive data through an institutional gatekeeper — deposit in a controlled- access repository (dbGaP, EGA) with a Data Access Committee and a published DUA — rather than through the corresponding author's inbox. An author-gated dataset dies with the author's email address, and 'on reasonable request' has been shown repeatedly not to yield data. For sensitive/human clinical / human-subjects data, use a controlled-access repository such as dbGaP or EGA.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"The study's own data are derived from public OAI data, and no gatekeeper is named for the derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"useful","scored":false},{"key":"a_timeline_retention","dimension":"A","label":"Availability timing & retention","action":"State when the data become available AND how long they will be retained — cite the repository's preservation policy. NIH DMS Element 4 asks for both; most papers give neither.","anchors":["yes","partial","no"],"verdict":"no","current":0.0,"evidence":null,"why":"No sentence addresses the timing or persistence of the study's own derived data. [majority verdict 'no' (4/5 passes agreed)]","gain":0.0,"priority":"useful","scored":false}],"suggestions":["Mint or cite a persistent identifier for the dataset — a repository DOI or an accession from a registered repository — and print it in the paper. A bare URL is not persistent: it is the single most common cause of a dead data link five years after publication. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","Remove the precondition or justify it. Release the data at publication with no embargo, no registration wall, and no approval step — NIH's zero-embargo public- access rule (NOT-OD-25-101) has already made 'available at publication' the federal baseline for the article; the data should not lag behind it. For clinical / human-subjects data, deposit in dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA).","Attach a standard, machine-readable open licence to the deposit — CC0 or CC BY, which is what Horizon Europe and most funders expect — and print the licence identifier in the paper. 'Free to use' is not a licence: it grants nothing a reuser's institution can rely on.","Release the data in an open, community-standard format (CSV/TSV, JSON, HDF5, NetCDF, FASTQ, VCF, NIfTI…) instead of — or alongside — any proprietary or instrument-native format, and name the format in the paper. A dataset that needs a €2,000 licence to open is not reusable.","Publish the analysis code in a public forge, archive a tagged release with a DOI (Zenodo/Software Heritage), and cite that DOI in the paper. NIH DMS Element 2 asks for the tools and code, not only the data — and 'available on request' is not a locator. Archive the analysis code in a versioned repository (GitHub + a Zenodo release DOI)."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","agent_version":"fair_agent_v8","fulltext_source":"epmc_xml"},"fair_model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","fair_agent_version":"fair_agent_v8","fair_fulltext_source":"epmc_xml","fair_has_llm":true,"fair_computed_at":"2026-07-20T11:52:03.025746Z","clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}