Factors associated with the orthopaedic surgeon's decision to recommend total joint replacement in hip and knee osteoarthritis: an international cross-sectional study of 1905 patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with orthopaedic surgeons' decision to recommend total joint replacement (TJR) in people with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study in eleven countries. For consecutive outpatients with definite hip or knee OA consulting an orthopaedic surgeon, the surgeon's indication of TJR was collected, as well as patients' characteristics including comorbidities and social situation, OA symptom duration, pain, stiffness and function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]), joint-specific quality of life, Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) joint space narrowing (JSN) radiographic grade (0-4), and surgeons' characteristics. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were performed to identify factors associated with the indication of TJR, adjusted by country. RESULTS: In total, 1905 patients were included: mean age was 66.5 (standard deviation [SD], 10.8) years, 1082 (58.0%) were women, mean OA symptom duration was 5.0 (SD 7.0) years. TJR was recommended in 561/1127 (49.8%) knee OA and 542/778 (69.7%) hip OA patients. In multivariable analysis on 516 patients with complete data, the variables associated with TJR indication were radiographic grade (Odds Ratio, OR for one grade increase, for knee and hip OA, respectively: 2.90, 95% confidence interval [1.69-4.97] and 3.30 [2.17-5.03]) and WOMAC total score (OR for 10 points increase: 1.65 [1.32-2.06] and 1.38 [1.15-1.66], respectively). After excluding radiographic grade from the analyses, on 1265 patients, greater WOMAC total score was the main predictor for knee and hip OA; older age was also significant for knee OA. CONCLUSION: Radiographic severity and patient-reported pain and function play a major role in surgeons' recommendation for TJR.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".