MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376454976 · doi:10.1177/27536351231170956

Pre- and Post-Operative Rehabilitation Interventions in Patients at Risk of Poor Outcomes Following Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: Protocol for Two Systematic Reviews

2023· article· en· W4376454976 on OpenAlexaff
Motahareh Karimijashni, Samantha Yoo, Keely Barnes, Stéphane Poitras

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Rehabilitation Science and Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRehabilitationCINAHLPhysical therapyPsychological interventionArthroplastySystematic reviewMEDLINERandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisEvidence-based medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Protocol (science)SurgeryAlternative medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.082
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0820.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.026
Bibliometrics0.0150.015
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0110.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.007

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Rehabilitation Science and PracticeSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207