MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6922090798 · doi:10.11575/prism/40413

Exploring Health Locus of Control and Patient Preferences for the Non-Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis

2021· other· en· W6922090798 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisLocus of controlThematic analysisAffect (linguistics)DiseaseHealth professionalsArthropathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:There is no cure for osteoarthritis, and management aims to reduce pain and improve function. Despite guidelines, 61% of people are referred for surgery before trying non-surgical options, and this needs to be further understood. Many factors affect uptake of options, including the osteoarthritis information available to patients. Individual beliefs around who and whatinfluences health, or locus of control, is related to patient preferences for disease management. There is a paucity of literature on locus of control and preferences for osteoarthritis management.Objectives:To identify the factors that patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis consider when choosing management strategies, and to explore their beliefs about who and what influences osteoarthritis symptoms and progression.Methods:Semi-structured interviews with patients who self-reported a diagnosis by a medical professional with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis and had at least one osteoarthritic joint that had not undergone replacement. A multifaceted recruitment approach was used. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and the Braun and Clarke method for thematic analysis was employed.Results:Interviews were conducted with 13 patients from Alberta, Canada. Sixteen factors were identified that participants considered when choosing management strategies. Majority were extrinsic (11), relating to features of programs and services, while five were intrinsic relating to how individual perspectives influence decision making. Three novel factors emerged: 1) whether further management was desired, 2) the prospect of surgery, and 3) participants’ choice inmanagement. Three descriptive themes captured participants’ beliefs about who and what influences their osteoarthritis symptoms and progression: etiology, progression, and symptoms. Most participants believed that others and themselves had some influence over their osteoarthritis symptoms.Conclusions:The findings reinforced that patient’s management decisions for their osteoarthritis were based on the options available to them. This was the first study to explore locus of control in the context of non-surgical osteoarthritis management and provides a point of departure for future work. Factors that patients consider when choosing management strategies were also identifiedthat could be considered for subsequent quantitative research on patient preferences.Keywords: osteoarthritis, internal-external control, patient preference, conservative treatment,disease management, qualitative research

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→