Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35767040›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023

The utility of machine learning algorithms for the prediction of patient-reported outcome measures following primary hip and knee total joint arthroplasty.

Christian Klemt, Akachimere Cosmas Uzosike, John G Esposito, Michael Joseph Harvey, Ingwon Yeo, Murad Subih, Young-Min Kwon

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Optimal inputs for machine learning models in predicting total joint arthroplasty outcomes: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Surgical outcomes and patient-centred perioperative programs.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Christian KlemtBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Akachimere Cosmas UzosikeBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
John G EspositoBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Michael Joseph HarveyBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Ingwon YeoBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Murad SubihBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Young-Min KwonBioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. ymkwon@mgh.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used as quality benchmark in total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA; TKA) due to bundled payment systems that aim to provide a patient-centered, value-based treatment approach. However, there is a paucity of predictive tools for postoperative PROMs. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate machine learning models for the prediction of numerous patient-reported outcome measures following primary hip and knee total joint arthroplasty.

methodsA total of 4526 consecutive patients (2137 THA; 2389 TKA) who underwent primary hip and knee total joint arthroplasty and completed both pre- and postoperative PROM scores was evaluated in this study. The following PROM scores were included for analysis: HOOS-PS, KOOS-PS, Physical Function SF10A, PROMIS SF Physical and PROMIS SF Mental. Patient charts were manually reviewed to identify patient demographics and surgical variables associated with postoperative PROM scores. Four machine learning algorithms were developed to predict postoperative PROMs following hip and knee total joint arthroplasty. Model assessment was performed through discrimination, calibration and decision curve analysis.

resultsThe factors most significantly associated with the prediction of postoperative PROMs include preoperative PROM scores, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anaesthesiology score, insurance status, age, length of hospital stay, body mass index and ethnicity. The four machine learning models all achieved excellent performance across discrimination (AUC > 0.83), calibration and decision curve analysis.

conclusionThis study developed machine learning models for the prediction of patient-reported outcome measures at 1-year following primary hip and knee total joint arthroplasty. The study findings show excellent performance on discrimination, calibration and decision curve analysis for all four machine learning models, highlighting the potential of these models in clinical practice to inform patients prior to surgery regarding their expectations of postoperative functional outcomes following primary hip and knee total joint arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case control retrospective analysis.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeAlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeArtificial intelligenceHip and knee total joint arthroplastyMachine learningPatient-reported outcome measuresRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID35767040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.