A research agenda to improve patients’ experience of knee replacement surgery: a patient-oriented modified Delphi study of patients of South Asian origin in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Up to 1 in 5 patients who undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) express dissatisfaction with their surgery. Our goal was to understand the experiences of patients of South Asian origin who undergo TKA and to identify a research agenda for this patient population. METHODS: We undertook a modified Delphi study in British Columbia to generate and prioritize potential research topics. An initial list of topics was generated using 3 focus groups with patients of South Asian origin who underwent TKA and their caregivers. Focus group sessions were audiotaped and transcribed, and the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The resulting Delphi question-naire was administered over 2 rounds to patients, caregivers and health professionals. The second-round questionnaire included only topics that were strongly supported in the first round. A patient-oriented approach was adopted, with 3 patient partners as full research team members, who contributed to scoping, design, data collection, analysis and interpretation. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients who had undergone TKA and 6 caregivers attended the focus groups. Our analyses resulted in 6 broad themes and 25 research topics, all of which were presented in the first round of the Delphi survey. The survey was completed by 27 patients and 5 caregivers (54% combined response rate) and by 25 clinicians (76% response rate). Top priorities both for patients and caregivers and for clinicians were promoting exercise following surgery and self-management after hospital discharge. One of the highest ranked topics for patients and caregivers was improving knee implants; this was supported by only 60% of clinicians. INTERPRETATION: The patients and caregivers in our study prioritized research on promotion of exercise and self-management following surgery and improvement in knee implants. Future patient-oriented research efforts in Canada should emphasize these topics for this patient population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".