Does morbid obesity affect the outcome of total hip replacement?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the outcome of primary total hip replacement (THR) in 3290 patients with the primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis at a minimum follow-up of two years. They were stratified into categories of body mass index (BMI) based on the World Health Organisation classification of obesity. Statistical analysis was carried out to determine if there was a difference in the post-operative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, the Harris hip score and the Short-Form-12 outcome based on the BMI. While the pre- and post-operative scores were lower for the group classified as morbidly obese, the overall change in outcome scores suggested an equal if not greater improvement compared with the non-morbidly obese patients. The overall survivorship and rate of complications were similar in the BMI groups although there was a slightly higher rate of revision for sepsis in the morbidly obese group. Morbid obesity does not affect the post-operative outcome after THR, with the possible exception of a marginally increased rate of infection. Therefore withholding surgery based on the BMI is not justified.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".