Pre- and Post-Operative Rehabilitation Interventions in Patients at Risk of Poor Outcomes Following Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: Protocol for Two Systematic Reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Total knee (TKA) and hip arthroplasty (THA) are successful procedures in treating end-stage osteoarthritis when nonoperative treatments fail. However, a growing body of literature has been reporting suboptimal outcomes following TKA and THA. While pre- and post-operative rehabilitation is imperative to recovery, little is known about their effectiveness for patients at risk of poor outcomes. In the 2 systematic reviews with identical methodology, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of (a) pre-operative and (b) post-operative rehabilitation interventions for patients at risk of poor outcomes following TKA and THA. Methods: The 2 systematic reviews will follow the principles and recommendations outlined in the Cochrane Handbook. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pilot RCTs will be searched in 6 databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Pedro, and OTseeker. Eligible studies including patients at risk of poor outcomes and evaluating rehabilitation interventions following and preceding arthroplasty will be considered for inclusion. Primary outcomes will include performance-based tests and functional patient-reported outcome measures, and secondary outcomes will include health-related quality of life and pain. The quality of eligible RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and the strength of evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Discussion: These reviews will synthesize the evidence regarding the effectiveness of pre-and post-operative rehabilitation interventions for patients at risk of poor outcomes, which in turn may inform practitioners and patients in planning and implementing the most optimal rehabilitation programs to achieve the best outcomes after arthroplasty. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022355574.
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 | 0.007 | 0.192 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".