MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400290052 · doi:10.3390/healthcare12131329

A Pilot Study on the Efficacy of an App-Based Rehabilitation Counselling Program after Total Knee Arthroplasty

2024· article· en· W4400290052 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sang-Ho Han, Se-Hee Kong

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACRehabilitationPhysical therapyRange of motionOsteoarthritisMedicineVisual analogue scaleGuidelinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationTotal knee arthroplastyArthroplastyKnee JointSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of a novel app-based rehabilitation counselling program in patients recovering from total knee arthroplasty. In the app-based rehabilitation counselling program, a counselor provides one-on-one rehabilitation exercises and management-focused psychological counselling after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study included 42 patients, who were divided into three groups of 14 patients each: Group A, whose rehabilitation training was based on a guideline leaflet; Group B, whose rehabilitation was based on the app-based rehabilitation counselling program; and Group C, whose rehabilitation training was based on continuous passive motion combined with the app-based rehabilitation counselling program. To determine the effects of rehabilitation, the isokinetic knee muscle strength and knee joint range of motion were measured in addition to knee function tests such as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain at two and three months after rehabilitation. The comparison of the means of the three groups was analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), with Group C showing significant variance in isokinetic knee muscle strength (p < 0.05), passive ROM (p < 0.01), and WOMAC (p < 0.05) after three months. As a result, this study confirmed the positive potential of the app-based rehabilitation counselling program.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207