MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414350807 · doi:10.7759/cureus.92727

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Elderly: Do These Reflect Healing Post-Fragility Fracture of the Pelvis?

2025· article· en· W4414350807 on OpenAlexaff
Samantha Bartman, Cari Whyne, David Stephen, Diane Nam

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic and Acetabular Injuries
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Prospective cohort studyCohortPelvisBone healingCohort studyPatient-reported outcomeOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and objective Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFPs) have become increasingly common in the geriatric population. The prolonged healing process associated with current non-operative management of FFPs has a significant negative impact on patient mobility, independence, and quality of life (QoL). This study aimed to document functional outcomes and QoL measures in individuals with non-operatively treated FFPs and examine if a relationship exists between these parameters and healing status. Methods This was a prospective case series involving a cohort from a single level 1 trauma center. Fifty-three elderly patients (age ≥65 years) who, after a fall from less than 5 feet, sustained a non-operative FFP as diagnosed on X-ray between 2008 and 2019. Functional outcomes using Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA) and QoL measures based on 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were collected over two years. Healing was assessed per available follow-up X-ray imaging by four orthopaedic surgeons. Results Health status and function did not improve in elderly patients with stable FFPs treated non-operatively from reported baseline levels, with many MFA and SF-36 categories demonstrating a steady decline out to approximately 24 months. Follow-up X-ray imaging was only available for a subset of these individuals (n = 35). Substantial agreement was found between all four surgeon raters (Fleiss Kappa = 0.65) with respect to their evaluation of healing status. Confirmation of bone healing on X-ray (level 3) was found for only seven individuals. There was no association found between any MFA or SF-36 category and healing status for patients with coincident reporting (n = 16). Conclusions Overall, patient function and QoL decrease post-stable FFP, with no relationship evident between these measures and healing status. Worsening patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) regardless of healing status should prompt discussions and further investigations regarding the need for continued monitoring of non-operative FFPs post-injury.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicPelvic and Acetabular InjuriesFrench-language works237,207