ArticleBone & joint open2025
Prediction of quality-of-life improvement after total hip arthroplasty : a simplified and internally validated model based on 82,526 total hip arthroplasties from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register.
Article in Bone & joint open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Structured Critical Review and Descriptive Evidence Map of Validation, Uncertainty, and Workflow Integration.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- If the dead could speak, what would they teach? The hip arthroplasty register paradox. The Hernigou-Scarlat curves. Implants often outlive their owners!International orthopaedics · 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
Aims: Pain and poor health-related quality of life measures serve as the primary indication for primary elective total hip arthroplasty (THA). It remains challenging to predict whether THA delivers the patient-anticipated improvements. Our study aimed to develop and validate statistical and machine learning prediction models of one-year clinical improvement in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after elective THA. Methods: We included 82,526 patients with primary elective THAs from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SAR) for forecasting one-year improvements in the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) index, EQ-visual analogue scale (VAS), and combined EQ-5D/EQ-VAS scores. Two minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds were applied for the EQ-5D index score based on the approaches of standardized response mean (SRM) of 0.196 and capacity of benefit (CoB) of 0.428. MCID cutoff for the EQ-VAS was set to 7.81. A total of 21 features were used to feed the models. To avoid estimates bias, we eliminated missing data. Model performance was tested using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and importance of features was identified in the best performing algorithm. Results: Applying the SRM MCID, approximately two-thirds of patients reported one-year improvements in EQ-5D index (66.3%) and EQ-VAS (69.1%). The improvement rate decreased to 51.7% when we combined improvements in both outcomes. A higher CoB cut-off for EQ-5D index yielded lower rates (~40% for the EQ-5D index and 31.3% for the combined measure). The gradient boosting machine (GBM) consistently outperformed other models by a narrow margin in predicting significant clinical improvements in one-year PROMs and achieved a good to excellent binary discriminative power (AUC range 0.80% to 0.97%). Preoperative PROMs, EQ-5D index, EQ-VAS, and Charnley Hip Score, along with age, collectively contributed to over 80% of the algorithmic power in the ensemble GBM model. Conclusion: We developed an interpretable machine learning model on a Swedish cohort that may facilitate personalized assessment of meaningful clinical improvement after elective THA.
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.