Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Patient-Reported Outcomes After TKA Depend on Central Sensitization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To our knowledge, it is still unknown if central sensitization (CS) influences the magnitude of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for patient-reported outcome measures after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of CS on the MCID for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score in patients who underwent TKA for knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: A total of 422 patients who underwent unilateral TKA and completed a 2-year follow-up were enrolled in this study. CS was measured using the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI). The WOMAC score was used to evaluate preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes. The measurement of the MCID was performed separately for patients with and without CS using both the anchor-based method and the distribution method. The change difference method defined the MCID as the difference in preoperative-to-postoperative change between the minimal-improvement group and the no-change group. In addition, the MCID was calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The percentage of MCID achievement in each group was also compared. RESULTS: According to the change difference method, the MCID for the WOMAC total score was 23.4 points for patients with CS and 14.7 points for patients without CS. The MCID using the ROC cutoff value for the WOMAC total score was 29.5 points for the patients with CS and 26.5 points for the patients without CS. MCID achievement rates in WOMAC pain, function, and total scores were all found to be significantly higher in the patients without CS through the change difference method and the ROC method (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The MCID for the WOMAC score of patients with CS after TKA was greater than that for patients without CS. Furthermore, by applying the calculated MCID to the group to which the patients belonged (with or without CS), we determined that patients with CS showed a lower MCID achievement rate than patients without CS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.010 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".