MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395084285 · doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102401

Manual lymphatic drainage before and after total knee arthroplasty, a randomized controlled trial

2024· article· en· W4395084285 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Moritz Wagner, Andreas Wittlinger, Alexander Auffarth, Franz Endstrasser, Sabrina Neururer, Alexander Brunner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphatic System and Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSkånes universitetssjukhusLunds Universitet
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialTotal knee arthroplastySurgeryArthroplastyGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of MLD before and after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: This was a single-centre randomized, controlled and observer-blinded trial. 112 patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: group 1 underwent MLD for 30 min daily on five consecutive days both before and after TKA; group 2 underwent MLD for 30 min daily on five consecutive days only after TKA; and the control group did not undergo MLD. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, range of knee motion, swelling and pain were assessed before TKA, after two days, five days and six weeks. Results: The overall age of the patients was 69.4 years (SD = 9.8, range = 41-87). The groups were well matched in terms of sex, age, height, weight, and body mass index. There was no statistically significant difference with regard to any of the outcome measures between the groups. Conclusions: The present results indicate that MLD had no significant benefits when applied either before or early after TKA. Therefore, we do not recommend the routinely use of MLD in the early period before or after TKA. Further studies should evaluate the effect of MLD after arthroscopic surgery. Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level II, Lower quality RCT with follow up <80.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Orthopaedics and TraumaSame topicLymphatic System and DiseasesFrench-language works237,207