The role of presurgical expectancies in predicting pain and function one year following total 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
The present study examined the prospective value of response expectancies (ie, pain, sleep) and behavioral outcome expectancies (ie, return to function) in the prediction of pain severity and functional limitations 12 months after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The study sample consisted of 120 individuals (73 women, 47 men) with osteoarthritis of the knee who were scheduled for TKA. Measures of expectancies, pain severity, pain catastrophizing, pain-related fears of movement, and depression were completed prior to surgery. Participants also completed measures of pain severity and functional limitations 12 months following surgery. Analyses revealed that behavioral outcome expectancies were stronger predictors of follow-up pain and functional limitations than response expectancies. Consistent with previous research, analyses also revealed that pain catastrophizing, pain-related fear of movement, and depression predicted follow-up pain and function. In a multivariate analysis, only pain catastrophizing contributed significant unique variance to the prediction of follow-up pain and function. Behavioral outcome expectancies partially mediated the relation between catastrophizing and follow-up pain and function. The relation between catastrophizing and follow-up pain severity and functional limitations remained significant even when controlling for behavioral outcome expectancies. The results suggest that interventions designed to specifically target behavioral outcome expectancies and catastrophizing might improve post-surgical outcomes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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