MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922247806 · doi:10.11575/prism/44273

An individualized patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) based patient decision aid and surgeon report for patients considering total knee arthroplasty: protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

2019· other· en· W6922247806 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Calgary · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArtificial Immune Systems Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)Decision aidsOutcome (game theory)Total knee arthroplastyPatient-reported outcomeArthroplastyIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background While the rates of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to rise worldwide, there are concerns about whether all surgeries are appropriate. Guidelines for appropriateness suggest that patients should have realistic expectations for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and that the patient and their surgeon should agree that the potential benefits outweigh the potential harms. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether routinely collected pre- and post-TKA patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) could be integrated into a patient decision aid to better inform these appropriateness criteria. This randomised trial will evaluate the preliminary efficacy of a tailored PROM-based patient decision aid and surgeon report (compared to usual care) for patients considering TKA on decision quality. Methods This is a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial conducted at one site in Alberta, Canada. Adults over the age of 30 years, who have been scheduled for a TKA consultation at the Edmonton Bone and Joint Centre with a participating surgeon, who understand, speak, and read English, and can provide informed consent, are eligible to participate. Participants will be randomised to receive a PROM-based patient decision aid and surgeon report before their surgical consultation or usual care. The decision aid will provide patients with information on their expected outcomes based on the EQ-5D-5L PROM, and these estimates are individualized based on clinical and demographic characteristics. The primary outcome of this trial is decision quality. Analysis will consider outcomes intention to treat, and feasibility outcomes for implementing the trial to routine practise. Discussion This patient decision aid and surgeon report intervention could contribute to improved treatment decision-making for patients considering total knee arthroplasty. Trial registration (registry and number) ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03240913. Registered on August 1, 2017.

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)0.068
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0680.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.008
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.010

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of CalgarySame topicArtificial Immune Systems ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207