Predictive value of the DASH tool for predicting return to work of injured workers with musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) tool added to the predictive ability of established prognostic factors, including patient demographic and clinical outcomes, to predict return to work (RTW) in injured workers with musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders of the upper extremity. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using a population-based database from the Workers' Compensation Board of Alberta (WCB-Alberta) that focused on claimants with upper extremity injuries was used. Besides the DASH, potential predictors included demographic, occupational, clinical and health usage variables. Outcome was receipt of compensation benefits after 3 months. To identify RTW predictors, a purposeful logistic modelling strategy was used. A series of receiver operating curve analyses were performed to determine which model provided the best discriminative ability. RESULTS: The sample included 3036 claimants with upper extremity injuries. The final model for predicting RTW included the total DASH score in addition to other established predictors. The area under the curve for this model was 0.77, which is interpreted as fair discrimination. This model was statistically significantly different than the model of established predictors alone (p<0.001). When comparing the DASH total score versus DASH item 23, a non-significant difference was obtained between the models (p=0.34). CONCLUSIONS: The DASH tool together with other established predictors significantly helped predict RTW after 3 months in participants with upper extremity MSK disorders. An appealing result for clinicians and busy researchers is that DASH item 23 has equal predictive ability to the total DASH score.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".