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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yıldız Analay Akbaba, İpek Yeldan, Arzu Razak Özdi̇nçler, Nejat Güney

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical Therapy ScienceSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207