MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416541852 · doi:10.21653/tfrd.156467

Functional Mobility on Discharge Day After Total Knee and Hip Replacement Surgery

2014· article· en· W4416541852 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDergiPark (Istanbul University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACTotal hip replacementOsteoarthritisHip replacementKnee replacementBody mass indexHip surgeryTotal knee replacement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To examine functional mobility status on discharge day after total knee and hip replacement surgery in post-acute care hospital setting.Methods: Eighty patients following total knee and hip replacement surgery were assessed with the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI), the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) and Five Times Sit to Stand Test, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) measurements of mobility-related activity on discharge day. Demographic information comprised age, body mass index, gender, type of surgery,length of hospital stay. Since the normality of distribution of the data was not confirmed, nonparametric Mann-Whitney-U test was used for analysis.Results: Forty patients (mean age: 66.83±7.39 years) underwent total knee replacement (TKR) and 40 patients (mean age: 62.63±11.95 years) underwent total hip replacement (THR). No statistical difference was found in age, body mass index and length of hospital stay between patients (p>0.05). TKR patients had better results in mean WOMAC total score, WOMAC Physical Functioning Score and mean DEMMI total score compared to THR patients (p

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDergiPark (Istanbul University)Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207