MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1226662817 · doi:10.1589/jpts.27.2525

Patients’ preoperative perspectives concerning the decision to undergo total knee arthroplasty and comparison of their clinical assessments

2015· article· en· W1226662817 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Therapy Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTotal knee arthroplastyPhysical therapyArthroplastyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[Purpose] The aims of our study were, 1. to assess pain, limitation of movement ability, and functionality in osteoarthritis patients scheduled to undergo total knee arthroplasty, 2. to determine if pain (Group 1) or function loss (Group 2) has a greater influence on the decision of patients to have surgery, and 3. to compare results between Group 1 and Group 2. [Subject and Methods] Fifty-five osteoarthritis patients classified as grades 3 and 4 according to the Kellgren-Lawrence system of classification were evaluated for preoperative pain intensity with the Visual Analogue Scale, knee flexion/extension range of movement with a clinical goniometer, and function with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Patients were examined to reveal their reasons regarding the decision to undergo total knee arthroplasty (pain or function loss). [Results] The Visual Analog Scale scores at rest and during activity were 5.62 and 7.42, the knee flexion range of movement and extension limitation were 93.17° and -7.04°, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index value was 82.09. Regarding the decision to undergo surgery, 47.3% (n=26) of the knees were in Group 1, and 52.7% were in Group 2; the two groups were not significantly different. There were also no significant differences between the groups in Visual Analog Scale score during activity, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index value, and knee flexion range of movement and extension limitation. The only statistically significant difference was found in the Visual Analog Scale score at rest in Group 1, which was significantly higher than that in Group 2. [Conclusion] Our results showed that osteoarthritis patients decided to undergo surgery only if all of the parameters were impaired significantly. Both pain and function loss have a similar impact on a patient's decision to undergo surgery. We observed no significant difference in clinical and self-reported outcomes between patients who decided to undergo surgery due to pain or function loss.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it