Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38095688›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2024

Initial clinical experience with a predictive clinical decision support tool for anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Chelsey Simmons, Jessica DeGrasse, Sandrine Polakovic, William Aibinder, Thomas Throckmorton, Mayo Noerdlinger, Rick Papandrea, Scott Trenhaile, Bradley Schoch, Bruno Gobbato and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

13 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Chelsey SimmonsUniversity of Florida, PO Box 116250, Gainesville, FL, 32605, USA.
Jessica DeGrasseExactech, 2320 NW 66th Court, Gainesville, FL, 32653, USA.
Sandrine PolakovicBlueOrtho, 6 Allée de Bethléem, 38610, Gières, France.
William AibinderUniversity of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Thomas ThrockmortonCampbell Clinic, 7887 Wolf River Blvd, Germantown, TN, 38138, USA.
Mayo NoerdlingerAtlantic Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, 1900 Lafayette Road, Portsmouth, NH, USA.
Rick PapandreaOrthopaedic Associates of Wisconsin, Pewaukee, WI, USA.
Scott TrenhaileOrthoillinois, Rockford, IL, USA.
Bradley SchochMayo Clinic, Florida, 4500 San Pablo Rd., Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
Bruno Gobbato, R. José Emmendoerfer, 1449, Nova Brasília, Jaraguá do Sul, SC, 89252-278, Brazil.
Howard RoutmanAtlantis Orthopedics, 900 Village Square Crossing, #170, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, 33410, USA.
Moby Parsons, 333 Borthwick Ave Suite #301, Portsmouth, NH, 03801, USA.
Christopher P RocheExactech, 2320 NW 66th Court, Gainesville, FL, 32653, USA. Chris.Roche@exac.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3801-3272
Exactech (United States) · USCampbell Clinic · USCentro Universitário de Jaraguá do Sul · BRMayo Clinic in Florida · USOrthopaedic Associates of Michigan · USPortsmouth Regional Hospital · USUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeClinical decision support tools (CDSTs) are software that generate patient-specific assessments that can be used to better inform healthcare provider decision making. Machine learning (ML)-based CDSTs have recently been developed for anatomic (aTSA) and reverse (rTSA) total shoulder arthroplasty to facilitate more data-driven, evidence-based decision making. Using this shoulder CDST as an example, this external validation study provides an overview of how ML-based algorithms are developed and discusses the limitations of these tools.

methodsAn external validation for a novel CDST was conducted on 243 patients (120F/123M) who received a personalized prediction prior to surgery and had short-term clinical follow-up from 3 months to 2 years after primary aTSA (n = 43) or rTSA (n = 200). The outcome score and active range of motion predictions were compared to each patient's actual result at each timepoint, with the accuracy quantified by the mean absolute error (MAE).

resultsThe results of this external validation demonstrate the CDST accuracy to be similar (within 10%) or better than the MAEs from the published internal validation. A few predictive models were observed to have substantially lower MAEs than the internal validation, specifically, Constant (31.6% better), active abduction (22.5% better), global shoulder function (20.0% better), active external rotation (19.0% better), and active forward elevation (16.2% better), which is encouraging; however, the sample size was small.

conclusionA greater understanding of the limitations of ML-based CDSTs will facilitate more responsible use and build trust and confidence, potentially leading to greater adoption. As CDSTs evolve, we anticipate greater shared decision making between the patient and surgeon with the aim of achieving even better outcomes and greater levels of patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, ShoulderDecision Support Systems, ClinicalShoulder JointHumansPatient SatisfactionRange of Motion, ArticularRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeaTSACDSTClinical outcomesMachine learningrTSA

Identifiers

PMID38095688
OpenAlexW4389741659

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.