Frailty Factors and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Orthopedic Surgery: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frailty is an aggregate expression of susceptibility to adverse health outcomes because of age- and disease-related deficits that accumulate across multiple domains. Previous studies have found the presence of preoperative frailty is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes. The number of older adults undergoing orthopedic surgery is rapidly increasing. However, there has been no evidence-based study on the relationship between frailty and outcomes in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study are to investigate the association between frailty and outcomes in patients who underwent orthopedic surgery as well as patient factors associated with frailty. METHODS: The methods to be used for this systematic review are reported according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols) 2015 checklist. An extensive search will be conducted in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and other mainstream databases. Any study where patients undergoing orthopedic surgery were assessed using a defined or validated measure of frailty and the association of frailty with patient factors and/or outcomes was reported will be included. A total of 2 researchers will independently screen articles for inclusion, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We will perform a narrative synthesis of the factors associated with frailty, prevalence of frailty, effect of frailty on patient outcomes, and interventions for patients who are frail. A meta-analysis focusing on individual factors associated with frailty and the effect of frailty on patient outcomes will be performed, if applicable. The risk of bias will be evaluated. A subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be performed. RESULTS: Literature searches were conducted in September 2021 and the review is anticipated to be completed by the end of July 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis will provide an overview of frailty and investigate the relationship between frailty and patient outcomes as well as the relationship between patient factors and frailty in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. This study could potentially increase patients' awareness of the outcomes associated with frailty, compel clinical specialties to further acknowledge the concept of frailty, and enhance the development of assessment instruments and tools for frailty. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020181846; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=181846. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/28338.
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 | 0.067 | 0.112 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.006 |
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".