ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
A development of machine learning models to preoperatively predict insufficient clinical improvement after total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing preoperative planning technology in total joint arthroplasty with a real-time machine learning calculator: 1-year mortality risk in a value-based care era.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- Task-specific determinants of one-year performance after unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Machine learning prediction of post-traumatic osteoarthritis based on three-dimensional printing-derived joint congruence biomechanics in ankle fractures.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Development and validation of machine learning models for predicting rehabilitation non-response after knee arthroplasty.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIdentifying patients unlikely to achieve meaningful improvement following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) supports more effective shared decision-making (SDM). This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models that preoperatively predict insufficient clinical improvement one year after TKA using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) subscales and total scores, and to assess the important predictive variables.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive primary TKA patients from 2004 to 2022 at a single tertiary hospital was conducted. Insufficient clinical improvement was defined as not achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for each WOMAC subscale and total. Candidate preoperative variables included demographics, comorbidities, knee range of motion, radiologic variables, and WOMAC scores. A variety of ML models were evaluated using performance metrics for calibration and discrimination, as well as decision curve analysis and Shapley additive explanations.
resultsAmong the 3,810 TKAs included, the ExtraTrees model performed best for WOMAC pain, stiffness, function, and total scores, achieving AUCs of 0.92, 0.90, 0.87, and 0.89; recall rates of 0.79, 0.86, 0.70, and 0.83; and Brier scores of 0.09, 0.10, 0.11, and 0.06, respectively, along with demonstrating good calibration curves and net clinical benefit. Shapley additive explanations identified better preoperative WOMAC scores, osteoporosis, diabetes mellitus, older age, malignancy, and coronary artery disease as important predictors of insufficient clinical improvement.
conclusionsThe ML models demonstrated good performance in preoperatively predicting insufficient clinical improvement at 1 year after TKA based on WOMAC. These models have the potential to enhance SDM and perioperative patient management by preoperatively identifying approximately 70% to over 80% of patients likely to experience insufficient clinical improvement, with a specificity of about 80%, and by providing explanations regarding associated factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.