What's all that noise?The effect of co-morbidity on health outcome questionnaire results after knee arthroplasty
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We modified the Charnley Classification for hips to facilitate its use with knee arthroplasty patients and investigated what affect the different classes of co-morbidity had on the results of a spectrum of outcome questionnaires. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 3600 patients from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry were surveyed by post with a variety of questionnaires ranging from multiple-item general health, to a single-item knee arthroplasty specific questionnaire. All patients also completed a co-morbidity questionnaire, from which a modified Charnley Classification was generated for each patient. We then investigated the correlation and relationship between the results of the questionnaires and the different classes of co-morbidity. RESULTS: The results of the questionnaires tested varied significantly by Charnley Class, regardless of the specificity of the questionnaire used. INTERPRETATION: We suggest that co-morbidity should be taken into account in outcome studies utilizing general health or disease/site specific questionnaires.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it