MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2778103512 · doi:10.1177/2325967117745278

Mobile Web-Based Follow-up for Postoperative ACL Reconstruction: A Single-Center Experience

2017· article· en· W2778103512 on OpenAlexaff
James P. Higgins, John L. Semple, M. Lucas Murnaghan, Sarah Sharpe, John Theodoropoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnterior cruciate ligamentTrauma centerSurgeryRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The initial 6 weeks after surgery has been identified as an area for improvement in patient care. During this period, the persistence of symptoms that go unchecked can lead to unscheduled emergency room and clinic visits, calls to surgeons' offices, and readmissions. PURPOSE: To analyze postoperative data from a previous study examining postoperative outcomes in 2 patient populations following breast reconstruction and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with use of a patient-centered mobile application. Here, the authors establish whether this method of follow-up can provide useful insight specific to the orthopaedic patient population, and they determine whether the mobile platform has the potential to modify their postoperative treatment. In addition, the authors examine its utility for orthopaedic physicians and patients. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Eligible patients undergoing ACL reconstruction from 2 surgeons were consecutively recruited to use a mobile smartphone application that allowed physicians to monitor their recovery at home. Data from 32 patients were collected via the application and analyzed to evaluate recovery trends during the first 6 postoperative weeks. Following completion of the study, patients and physicians were interviewed on their experience. RESULTS: Data collected from each question in the mobile application provided insightful trends on daily real-time indicators of postoperative recovery. The application identified 1 patient who required in-person reassessment to rule out a possible infection, following surgeon review of an uploaded image. It was estimated that the majority of patients could have avoided follow-up at 2 and 6 weeks, owing to the application's efficacy. Participants described their satisfaction with the device as excellent (43%), good (40%), fair (10%), and poor (7%), and 94% (n = 30) of patients reported that they would respond to questions using a similar application in the future. Both physicians rated their experience as positive and identified useful traits in the web portal. CONCLUSION: This system can accurately assess patient recovery; it has the potential to change how postoperative orthopaedic patients are followed, and it is well received by patients and physicians. Recognition of the study's limitations and employment of user feedback to improve the current application are essential before a formal randomized controlled trial is conducted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207