Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to Optimize Post-Operative Fracture Recovery (COPE): protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Chronic, non-cancer pain affects approximately 20-30% of the population in North America, Europe, and Australia, with surgery and trauma frequently cited as inciting events. Prospective studies of fracture patients have demonstrated an association between somatic pre-occupation, poor coping, and low recovery expectations following surgery with persistent pain, functional limitations, and lower rates of return to work. Psychological interventions, such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), that are designed to modify unhelpful beliefs and behaviours have the potential to reduce persistent post-surgical pain and its associated effects among trauma patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether online CBT, versus usual care, reduces the prevalence of moderate to severe persistent post-surgical pain among participants with an open or closed fracture of the appendicular skeleton. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to Optimize Post-Operative Fracture Recovery (COPE) protocol will be followed to conduct a multi-centre randomized controlled trial. Participants undergoing surgical repair of a long bone fracture will be randomized to receive either (1) online CBT modules with asynchronous therapist feedback or (2) usual care. The primary outcome will be the prevalence of moderate to severe persistent post-surgical pain over 12 months post-fracture. Secondary outcomes include the Short Form-36 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores, return to function, pain severity and pain interference over 12 months post-fracture, and the proportion of patients prescribed opioid class medications (and average dose) at 6 and 12 months post-fracture. The COPE trial will enroll 1000 participants with open and closed fractures of the appendicular skeleton from approximately 10 hospitals in North America. DISCUSSION: If CBT is effective in improving outcomes among patients with traumatic fractures, our findings will promote a new model of care that incorporates psychological barriers to recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04274530. Registered on 14 February 2020.
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 | 0.031 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.111 | 0.018 |
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".