The Relationship between Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Score and Satisfaction after Total Knee Arthroplasty Changes Over Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aimed to determine whether there was a relationship between preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and whether there was a relationship between the amount of improvement in PROM or final PROM and satisfaction and whether that relationship differed 1 and 2 years after TKA. The Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and satisfaction of 267 limbs who underwent TKA were analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether there was a relationship between preoperative WOMAC or improvement in WOMAC or final WOMAC and satisfaction at 1 and 2 years after TKA. Pearson and Filon's z test was performed to determine whether there was a difference in evaluating satisfaction between the amount of improvement in WOMAC and final WOMAC. There was no significant relationship between preoperative WOMAC and satisfaction. A higher improvement in WOMAC total score and better final WOMAC total scores at 1 and 2 years after TKA were related to greater satisfaction. At 1 year after TKA, there was no significant difference in evaluating satisfaction between the amount of improvement in WOMAC and final WOMAC. However, 2 years after TKA, the final WOMAC function and total score were more related to satisfaction than the amount of improvement in WOMAC function and total score. In the early postoperative period, there was no difference in evaluating satisfaction between the amount of improvement in WOMAC and final WOMAC, whereas over time, the final WOMAC was more related to satisfaction.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".