MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913328397 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.181066

Uptake of the OMERACT-OARSI Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis Core Outcome Set: Review of Randomized Controlled Trials from 1997 to 2017

2019· review· en· W2913328397 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Toby O. Smith, Michael Mansfield, Gillian Hawker, David J. Hunter, Lyn March, Maarten Boers, Beverley Shea, Robin Christensen, Françis Guillemin, Caroline B. Terwee, Paula Williamson, Ewa M. Roos, Richard F. Loeser, Thomas J. Schnitzer, M. Kloppenburg, Tuhina Neogi, C. Ladel, Gurdyal Kalsi, Ulrike Kaiser, Thomas Buttel, A. E. Ashford, Ali Mobasheri, Nigel Arden, Alan H. Tennant, Marc C. Hochberg, Maarten de Wit, Peter Tugwell, Philip G. Conaghan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesSyddansk UniversitetUniversiteit LeidenUniversity of LeedsNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity of OttawaDepartment of Health and Social CareMerck KGaAAmsterdam University Medical CentersParker Institute for Cancer ImmunotherapyOdense UniversitetshospitalOttawa Hospital Research InstituteUniversity of SurreyNorthwestern UniversityUniversité de LorraineLeeds Biomedical Research CentreFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western AustraliaUniversity of OxfordFeinberg School of MedicineUniversity of New South WalesSchool of Medicine, Boston University
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyCore (optical fiber)Outcome (game theory)Internal medicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the uptake of the OMERACT-OARSI (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology- Osteoarthritis Research Society International) core outcome set (COS) domains in hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA) trials. METHODS: There were 382 trials of hip and/or knee OA identified from the ClinicalTrial.gov registry from 1997 to 2017. Frequency of COS adoption was assessed by year and per 5-yearly phases. RESULTS: COS adoption decreased from 61% between 1997 and 2001 to 38% between 2012 and 2016. Pain (95%) and physical function (86%) were most consistently adopted. Patient's global assessment (48%) was the principal missing domain. CONCLUSION: Limited adoption of the COS domains indicates that further consideration to improve uptake is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.155
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.155
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
DomainReporting
GenreReview

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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207