MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Surgical outcome of EMPK prosthesis in end stage osteoarthritis patients: A prospective observational study

2025· article· W7105563300 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Orthopaedics Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyOsteoarthritisProsthesisProspective cohort studyArthroplastyStage (stratigraphy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common long-term condition that greatly contributes to disability among older adults. This disorder influences the entire joint, making it particularly difficult to regenerate articular cartilage, especially when active inflammation is present. Being a key weight-bearing joint, the knee is especially prone to OA, which makes it one of the foremost contributors to disability around the globe. Despite its extensive effects, there have been impressive advancements in treatment options in recent years. Methods: The prospective observational study was conducted in four sites which included 150 patients and evaluated a total of 216 knees that received total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the EXCEL MEDIAL PIVOTAL KNEE SYSTEM (EMPK) prosthesis. Clinical outcomes were assessed utilizing established patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Knee Society Score (KSS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), both prior to the surgery and six months following it. Results: The study involved an average age of 65.7±7.19 years with a greater proportion participated by female patients. After six months post-surgery assessment the mean Oxford Knee Score (OKS) rose significantly from 13.4±3.5 prior to surgery to 30.0±4.1 (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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Orthopaedics SciencesSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207