[Early clinical outcomes of fixed-bearing versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the early clinical outcomes of primary total knee arthroplasty by a fixed-bearing versus mobile-bearing prosthesis. METHODS: A total of 80 patients with osteoarthritis at our hospital from January 2008 to October 2008 were sequentially and randomly assigned into Group A (fixed-bearing prosthesis) (40 knees) and Group B (mobile-bearing prosthesis) (40 knees). And the data of the range of motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS) and Western Ontario MacMaster (WOMAC) were collected at pre-operation and 6, 12 and 24 months post-operation respectively. RESULTS: The P values were as follows: KSS: 0.754, 0.802, 0.561, 0.764; HSS (Hospital for Special Surgery): 0.737, 0.361, 0.254, 0.330; WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index: 0.976, 0.557, 0.946, 0.818; ROM follow-up: 0.519, 0.646, 0.175, 0.276. No significant differences were found in clinical outcomes between two groups. CONCLUSION: The fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing prostheses show no difference in clinical 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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".