MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406870740 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0318067

The impact of depression and anxiety disorders on postoperative outcomes for patients having total hip or knee arthroplasty: Protocol of a meta-analytic study from cohort studies

2025· article· en· W4406870740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Liang Lin, Qing Zhang, Min Xu, Zhihong Xiao, Guosong Xu, Zubing Mei

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnxietyFunnel plotMeta-analysisPublication biasPhysical therapyPerioperativeArthroplastyDepression (economics)MEDLINECohort studyCochrane LibraryCohortPsychiatryInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are widely performed surgeries for end-stage joint disease, yet the influence of depression and anxiety on postoperative outcomes remains unclear. This study aims to consolidate current evidence on the relationship between preoperative depression and/or anxiety disorders and postoperative outcomes in adult patients undergoing primary THA or TKA. Given the potential for these psychiatric conditions to affect recovery, pain management, and overall satisfaction, the results of this study are crucial to inform targeted perioperative interventions and improve patient-centered care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO from inception to the November 2024, adopting a comprehensive search strategy with no language restrictions. Eligible studies will include cohort studies evaluating adults with a diagnosis of depression and/or anxiety before THA or TKA compared to those without such disorders. Inclusion criteria will focus on preoperative psychiatric diagnoses, clearly defined postoperative outcomes (such as complications, functional recovery measures, pain, length of stay, and patient-reported outcomes). Risk of bias assessment will be performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis will be conducted using a random-effects model to calculate pooled risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals for each outcome. Heterogeneity will be quantified with the I2 statistic, and a threshold of I2 > 50% will indicate substantial heterogeneity. Sources of heterogeneity will be explored via subgroup analyses or meta-regression if possible. Potential publication bias will be visually assessed using funnel plots and statistically tested using Egger's test. Sensitivity analyses will be carried out to evaluate the robustness of the results for each outcome through leave-one-out procedure. DISCUSSION: This study will introduce a systematic and rigorous approach to synthesizing evidence from multiple cohorts, providing a comprehensive understanding of the impact of depression and anxiety on THA and TKA outcomes. The findings will guide clinicians in recognizing and managing mental health issues to optimize postoperative recovery and ultimately improve patient satisfaction and quality of life. STUDY REGISTRATION: Study registration: CRD42024500008.

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)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.055
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→