MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298394438 · doi:10.26603/001c.38043

Rehabilitation Guidelines for Use Following a Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO): A North American Based Delphi Consensus

2022· article· en· W4298394438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashley Disantis, Ethan Ruh, RobRoy L. Martin, Keelan R. Enseki, Michael P. McClincy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Physical Therapy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodRehabilitationDelphiMedicineOsteotomyPhysical therapySurgeryComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Treatment of acetabular dysplasia with a periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) has been shown to improve long term outcomes and is considered the gold standard in the setting of symptomatic hip dysplasia in patients younger than 35 years of age. Post-operative rehabilitation following a PAO plays an important role in helping patients return to their prior level of function and reduce the impact of strength deficits that may persist. Currently, there is a paucity of research supporting post-operative rehabilitation guidelines. The purpose of this study is to present expert-driven rehabilitation guidelines to reduce practice variation following a PAO. Methods: A panel of 16 physiotherapists from across the United States and Canada who were identified as experts in PAO rehabilitation by high-volume hip preservation surgeons participated in this Delphi study. Panelists were presented with 11 questions pertaining to rehabilitation guidelines following a PAO. Three iterative survey rounds were presented to the panelists based on responses to these questions. This three-step Delphi method was utilized to establish consensus on post-operative rehabilitation guidelines following a PAO. Results: Total (100%) participation was achieved for all three survey rounds. Consensus (>75%) was reached for 11/11 questions pertaining to the following areas: 1) weight-bearing and range of motion (ROM) precautions, 2) therapeutic exercise prescription including neuromuscular control, cardiovascular exercise, and flexibility, and 3) objective measures for return to straight line running and return to full participation in sports. Conclusion: This Delphi study established expert-driven rehabilitation guidelines for use following a PAO. The standardization of rehabilitative care following PAO is essential for achieving optimal outcomes despite other factors such as geographical location and socioeconomic status. Further research on patient-reported outcomes is necessary to confirm successful rehabilitation following the guidelines outlined in this 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.124
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1240.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Physical TherapySame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207