Sex does not clinically influence the functional outcome of total knee arthroplasty but females have a lower rate of satisfaction with pain relief
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aims were to assess whether sex had a clinically significant independent influence on the outcome of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) according to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, Short Form (SF-) 12 scores and patient satisfaction at 1 year. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 3510 primary TKA were identified. Patient demographics, comorbidities, WOMAC and SF-12 scores were collected preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Patient satisfaction were assessed at 1 year. RESULTS: There were 1584 males and 1926 females. The preoperative WOMAC and SF-12 scores were significantly (p < 0.001) worse in females but were not greater than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). When adjustments had been made for confounding differences, females showed a significantly greater improvement in their function (1.5 points, p = 0.03) and total (1.5 points, p = 0.03) WOMAC scores compared to males, but these were not greater than the MCID. When adjustments had been made for confounding differences, females were less likely to be satisfied with their pain relief (p = 0.03) relative to males. CONCLUSION: Sex does not clinically influence the knee specific outcome (WOMAC) or overall generic (SF-12) health 1 year after TKA. However, satisfaction with pain relief after TKA was significantly less likely in female patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: Prognostic retrospective cohort study.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".