Racial Variation in Total Knee Replacement in a Diverse Nationwide Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Racial variation in total knee replacement (TKR) utilization in the United States has been reported in administrative database studies. We investigated racial variation in TKR procedures in a diverse cohort with severe knee pain followed in an ongoing clinical trial. METHODS: VITAL (VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL) is a nationwide, randomized controlled trial of 25,874 adults, 20% of whom are black. We identified a subgroup highly likely to have knee osteoarthritis based on severity of knee pain, physician-diagnosed knee osteoarthritis, and inability to walk 2 to 3 blocks without pain. Participants completed a modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at baseline and self-reported incident TKR annually in follow-up. Using Cox regression, we analyzed the association of black versus white race with TKR, adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, comorbidities, and WOMAC pain and function. RESULTS: Among 1070 participants who met the inclusion criteria, black participants reported worse baseline WOMAC pain (45 vs. 32, P < 0.001) and worse function (45 vs. 32, P < 0.001). During a median of 3.6 years (interquartile range, 3.2, 3.8 years) of follow-up, TKRs were reported by 180 participants. Black participants were less likely to undergo TKR (11% vs. 19%). After adjustment, the hazard ratio for TKR for black versus white participants was 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.81). Lower use of TKR among black participants was observed across all levels of income and education. CONCLUSIONS: Despite worse baseline knee pain and function, black participants had much lower adjusted risk of having TKR than white participants, demonstrating persistent racial disparity in TKR utilization.
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 | 0.009 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".