MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982561197 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-19-00455

Usage Trends of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Shoulder Literature

2019· article· en· W2982561197 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zachary A. Mosher, Michael A. Ewing, Christine S. Collins, Patrick G. Young, Eugene W. Brabston, Amit Momaya, Robert Z. Tashjian, Brent A. Ponce

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromMedicinePatient-reported outcomeRotator cuffPhysical therapyVisual analogue scaleMEDLINERating scaleRange of motionQuality of life (healthcare)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Quantifying patient outcomes is integral in orthopaedic practice, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assist with this goal and assist clinicians in assessing subjective outcomes (pain, satisfaction, etc.). This study seeks to identify the most highly used PROMs in the shoulder literature and analyze their usage trends. METHODS: PubMed was queried for all shoulder-based articles published in eight selected journals from 2007 to 2017. Articles were assessed for PROM usage, surgical approach, surgical procedure, and disease pathology. Frequency analyses identified the most used PROMs overall, and for each approach, procedure, and pathology. Last, usage trends, question number, validation, and clinician dependence of PROMs with ≥20 uses were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 1,740 of 2,462 articles (71%) used 105 unique PROMs 4,394 times during the study. PROM usage increased 18%, and the use of multiple PROMs increased by 20%. PROMs with a clinician component increased 21% slower than the baseline. Twenty-two PROMs (17%) had >20 uses, with the most used PROMs being the Constant-Murley Score (783), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (731), Visual Analog Scale (685), Simple Shoulder Test (372), and the University of California, Los Angeles, Shoulder Rating Scale (274). PROMs demonstrating the greatest usage increase were the EuroQol 5-Dimensions Questionnaire (1,282%), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (638%), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (632%), Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (582%), and Oxford Shoulder Score (462%)-all without a clinician component. DISCUSSION: PROM usage is increasing, often with multiple PROMs being used to evaluate patient outcomes. PROMs without a clinician component are growing at higher rates than their clinician-dependent counterparts, highlighting an emphasis on patient reporting of outcomes. This study suggests that the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score, Oxford Shoulder Score, Visual Analog Scales-all without a mandatory clinician component and high levels of use-will be the most highly used PROMs moving forward to assess shoulder function.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.299 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations55
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207