15-year patient-reported outcomes of a cemented flanged cup and stem combination in primary total hip arthroplasty: a New Zealand study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods: We investigated 15-year patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) and their predictors in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis using a cemented flanged cup and stem from a regional joint registry in New Zealand. Regional data were collected for all primary THAs with this cemented combination from 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2023 who had recorded PROMs on at least 1 occasion ( n = 263). PROMs included Oxford Hip Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and Veterans Rand-12, evaluated against patient age, ethnicity, sex, body mass index (BMI), funding pathway, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) rating. Results: Significant improvements across preoperative PROMs were noted 1-year post-surgery, with a mean change above 23 in the Oxford Hip Score maintained at 5, 10, and 15 years ( p ⩽ 0.001). Conclusions: Regression analysis indicated that being female, public funding, and higher BMI were associated with worse preoperative PROMs. Poorer preoperative scores, older age and ASA 3 rating correlated with poorer postoperative outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".