MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410616702 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0324907

A pilot randomized controlled trial examining the feasibility of perioperative rehabilitation for inguinal hernia repair surgery

2025· article· en· W4410616702 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Shologan, Omar Farooq, Geoffrey Bostick, Luciana Macedo, Quentin Durand‐Moreau, M. Robert Peters, Douglas P. Gross

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHernia repair and management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersMedtronic Canada
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPrehabilitationInguinal herniaPhysical therapyRehabilitationPerioperativePopulationInguinal hernia surgerySurgeryHernia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the high frequency of inguinal hernia repair (IHR) surgery, there is little research investigating pre- or post-operative exercise and education in this population. Recommendations regarding perioperative physical activity are inconsistent and largely based on clinical opinion. We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial to examine the feasibility of perioperative rehabilitation for inguinal hernia repair surgery in terms of recruitment rate, assessment, and protocol implementation. METHODS: Participants were randomized into an intervention group and control group. Descriptive and patient-reported data were collected through online surveys at baseline, post-prehabilitation (prehab), 1-week post-operative (post-op), and 12-week post-op. Eligible participants completed a performance-based modified Short Form Functional Capacity Evaluation conducted by a masked observer at baseline, after 6 weeks of exercise and/or education, and at 12-week post-op. Participants in the intervention group received 6 weeks of exercise and education prior to and then after surgery. The control group received care as usual. RESULTS: Thirty-one participants awaiting IHR with a mean age of 49 years were recruited (recruitment rate of 51.7%). Thirty participants were randomized into control (n = 16) and intervention groups (n = 14), while 1 dropped out prior to beginning the study due to being unable to take time off work for assessment. Twenty-four participants completed the final 12-week post-op follow-ups. Twenty-one participants returned to work by the 12-week post-op follow-up. Sixty-seven percent of participants in the intervention group exercised at least 3 times per week post-operatively. One participant in each group experienced exacerbations of hernia symptoms that were unrelated to study activities. Functional testing resulted in minimal symptom exacerbation in either group, but the intervention group reported less pain at 12-week post-op than controls. CONCLUSION: A randomized trial of perioperative rehabilitation for patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair appears feasible, but protocol adjustments are needed to improve recruitment rate, assessment, and participant retention. Trial Registration: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05069142.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHernia repair and managementFrench-language works237,207