MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1962544019 · doi:10.1016/j.arth.2015.06.012

WOMAC, EQ-5D and Knee Society Score Thresholds for Treatment Success After Total Knee Arthroplasty

2015· article· en· W1962544019 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

VenueThe Journal of Arthroplasty · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsWOMACTotal knee arthroplastyMedicineOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyPatient satisfactionArthroplastyEQ-5DSurgeryHealth related quality of lifeInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our study aimed at developing clinical thresholds (cut-off scores) for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index, EQ-5D and Knee Society Score for discriminating between patients with and without treatment success following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We performed a retrospective analysis of 1055 patients 2 months after TKA and 765 patients 1 year after TKA. We considered treatment successful if the patient reported high levels of satisfaction and pain relief, functional increase, and a willingness to undergo the same procedure again. Based on this criterion we identified cut-off scores that will facilitate interpretation of the WOMAC, the EQ-5D and the KSS in TKA patients.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.229 · 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