MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design Issues in a Non-Regulatory Trial

2009· review· en· W2029562441 on OpenAlexaff
Brad Petrisor, Christina L. Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Long-Term Effects of Medical Implants · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlindingRandomized controlled trialRandomizationOrthopedic surgeryMedicineMedical physicsClinical study designPhysical therapyClinical trialSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) represent the highest level of evidence attainable. Although up to 60% of clinical questions cannot be answered by an RCT, it is still the ideal method of comparing orthopedic implants. The strength of the findings of RCTs is a result of the investigator’s ability to limit bias through careful attention to study design. Bias may be limited through randomization, allocation concealment, and blinding. Unfortunately, RCTs involving different surgical techniques or implants present many challenges that may introduce bias and threaten the validity of study results. The purpose of this review is to outline these issues and present possible solutions to these challenges, with the ultimate goal of improving surgeons’ understanding of how to design and critically appraise RCTs involving orthopedic implants.

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 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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.182 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Long-Term Effects of Medical ImplantsSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207