Effects of physiotherapy interventions for home-based rehabilitation on physical function after primary total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to provide a systematic and transparent overview of the effects of common physiotherapy techniques and exercises for the rehabilitation of patients following total knee arthroplasty. INTRODUCTION: Many protocols exist for the rehabilitation of patients after total knee arthroplasty, but there is a lack of systematic evidence on rehabilitation components, including precise exercise descriptions and their parameters. This review will fill in some of the gaps in reporting on scientific rehabilitation protocol components and the evaluation of their effectiveness. INCLUSION CRITERIA: We will include randomized controlled trials investigating active and passive physiotherapy techniques and exercises employed after primary total knee arthroplasty, and which report concrete parameters, such as dosage, duration, frequency, intensity, and function-related measurements. We will exclude other study types and randomized controlled trials reporting on techniques and exercises without precise descriptions. METHODS: This review will aim to find both published and unpublished studies. The key information sources to be searched are MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), PEDro, Cochrane CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full texts; assess the methodological quality; and extract the data. We will perform narrative synthesis, followed by meta-analyses for pooled studies, where possible. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022309185.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".