Effect of sex and living arrangement on the timing and outcome of joint replacement surgery.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that women present for surgery at an older age and with greater dysfunction than do men; however, the explanation for this finding is unclear. We investigated the impact living status (alone or with another person) and sex on the timing and outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery. METHODS: We surveyed 1722 patients undergoing primary hip or knee replacement surgery. Relevant covariates including demographic data, body mass index, sex, living status and comorbidities were recorded. We assessed joint pain and functional status before surgery and at 3 months and 1 year after surgery using the Western Ontario McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores for pain and function. RESULTS: In total, 22.9% (395) of all patients (29.3% of women and 14.1% of men) were living alone at the time of surgery. Compared with patients who lived with another person, those who lived alone were significantly older, had greater comorbidity and reported greater joint pain and dysfunction before surgery and 3 months and 1 year after surgery. Living alone and female sex independently predicted a greater preoperative WOMAC score, and living alone predicted an older age at the time of surgery and a poorer 1-year outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients who live alone may delay joint replacement surgery until an older age and have greater joint pain and dysfunction than those who live with another person, leading to poorer 1-year outcomes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.005 | 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".