Outcomes and complications of total hip replacement in super-obese patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the complications and outcomes of total hip replacement (THR) in super-obese patients (body mass index (BMI) > 50 kg/m(2)) compared with class I obese (BMI 30 to 34.9 kg/m(2)) and normal-weight patients (BMI 18.5 to 24.9 kg/m(2)), as defined by the World Health Organization. A total of 39 THRs were performed in 30 super-obese patients with a mean age of 53 years (31 to 72), who were followed for a mean of 4.2 years (2.0 to 11.7). This group was matched with two cohorts of normal-weight and class I obese patients, each comprising 39 THRs in 39 patients. Statistical analysis was performed to determine differences among these groups with respect to complications and satisfaction based on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index, the Harris hip score (HHS) and the Short-Form (SF)-12 questionnaire. Super-obese patients experienced significantly longer hospital stays and higher rates of major complications and readmissions than normal-weight and class I obese patients. Although super-obese patients demonstrated reduced pre-operative and post-operative satisfaction scores, there was no significant difference in improvement, or change in the score, with respect to HHS or the WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Super-obese patients obtain similar satisfaction outcomes as class I obese and normal-weight patients with respect to improvement in their scores. However, they experience a significant increase in length of hospital stay and major complication and readmission rates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".