A patient‐centered perspective on surgery avoidance for hip or knee arthritis: Lessons for the future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Research indicates that there is a discrepancy between need and patient preference for total joint arthroplasty (TJA), an efficacious and cost-effective treatment for severe hip or knee arthritis. To understand this discrepancy, we conducted qualitative research to assess the illness perceptions and preferred accommodations and coping strategies of patients with advanced osteoarthritis who had expressed a preference to avoid TJA. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with a community sample of 29 men and women who were medically assessed as appropriate candidates for TJA but who had expressed a preference to avoid surgery. Inductive content analysis of text data was used to examine how patients' illness perceptions and preferred coping strategies related to surgery preference. RESULTS: Participants frequently rejected the medicalization of arthritis, normalizing the experience of functional decline and defining it as age normative. Participants drew on a broad set of previous experiences with informal and formal care to make decisions about how to manage their condition. Previous negative encounters in medical and surgical care, including those from a distant past or those experienced vicariously, combined with the perception (reinforced by physicians and others) that doing nothing was a viable option deterred arthritis-related help seeking in the health care system. CONCLUSION: Individuals with arthritis may benefit from additional counseling regarding effective medical and surgical treatments. Physicians may better meet patient needs by gauging patient preferences for a combination of self-management strategies and medical interventions.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".