Incidence Rates of Surgery After Knee MRI: Association According to Referring Physician Type and Patient’s Age and Sex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The utility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the primary care setting is uncertain, with a perception that there is less likelihood for surgery after MRI ordered by general practitioners (GPs) when compared with orthopaedic surgeons and sports medicine physicians. Additionally, the influence of patient age and sex on subsequent surgical intervention is currently unknown. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare surgical incidence after MRI referrals by orthopaedic surgeons, GPs, and sports medicine physicians, including a subset analysis for GP patients based on type of approval given by the radiologist. The authors also wanted to explore the association of age and sex on subsequent surgical intervention. They hypothesized that surgical incidence after MRI ordered by orthopaedic surgeons and sports medicine physicians would be higher than after MRI ordered by GPs. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Knee MRI referrals by the 3 physician cohorts during May to December 2017 were assessed. For GP patients, the types of approval or recommendation from a radiologist were categorized. Subsequent surgical intervention status was then compared among referral groups up to 2 years after MRI. Associations of age and sex with surgical occurrence were also assessed. Chi-square test, analysis of variance, and univariate/multivariable logistic regression were used for statistical analysis. Results: Overall, 407 referrals were evaluated (GP, n = 173; orthopaedic, n = 176; sports medicine, n = 58). Surgical incidence was not significantly higher for orthopaedic and sports medicine than GP referrals at 3 months (10%, 3%, and 6%, respectively; P = .23), 6 months (20%, 17%, and 15%; P = .49), and 2 years (30%, 35%, and 24%; P = .25). Surgical incidence for GP patients was higher after discussion with a radiologist or when evaluating specific pathology on prior imaging versus less defined reasons (30.4% vs 15.7%, respectively; P = .03). Surgical incidence was lower for older patients (11% vs 31% for >60 years vs all other age groups combined; P = .002), and women were less likely to undergo surgery than men (22% vs 35%, respectively; P = .008). Conclusion: Surgical incidence after MRI was likely appropriately lower for older patients. Lower incidence for female patients is of uncertain cause and warrants further 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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".