Harvard
Mikkelsen, M, Gao, A
, Ingelsrud, LH, Beard, D
, Troelsen, A & Price, A 2021, '
Categorization of changes in the Oxford Knee Score after Total Knee Replacement: An interpretive tool developed from a dataset of 46,094 replacements',
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, bind 132, s. 18-25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.007
APA
Mikkelsen, M., Gao, A.
, Ingelsrud, L. H., Beard, D.
, Troelsen, A., & Price, A. (2021).
Categorization of changes in the Oxford Knee Score after Total Knee Replacement: An interpretive tool developed from a dataset of 46,094 replacements.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,
132, 18-25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.007
CBE
MLA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
@article{f70ec55dee7d40dc86c773a3fe2089d5,
title = "Categorization of changes in the Oxford Knee Score after Total Knee Replacement: An interpretive tool developed from a dataset of 46,094 replacements",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to create an interpretive categorical classification for the transition in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) change score (ΔOKS) using the anchor-based method.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Registry data from 46,094 total knee replacements from the year 2014/15, were accessed via the Health and Social Care Information Center official website. Data included preoperative and 6-month follow-up OKS and response to the transition anchor question. Categories were determined using Gaussian approximation probability and k-fold cross-validation.RESULTS: Four categories were identified with the corresponding ΔOKS intervals: {"}1. much better{"} (≥16), {"}2. a little better{"} (7-15), {"}3. about the same{"} (1-6), and {"}4. much worse{"} (≤0) based on the anchor questions' original five categories. The mean 10-fold cross-validation error was 0.35 OKS points (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.63). Sensitivity ranged from 0.34 to 0.68; specificity ranged from 0.74 to 0.95.CONCLUSION: We have categorized the change score into a clinically meaningful classification. We argue it should be an addition to the continuous OKS outcome to contextualize the results in a way more applicable to the shared decision-making process and for interpreting research results.",
keywords = "Interpretive tool, Knee replacement, Oxford Knee Score, Patient-reported outcome",
author = "Mette Mikkelsen and Anqi Gao and Ingelsrud, {Lina Holm} and David Beard and Anders Troelsen and Andrew Price",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2021",
month = apr,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.007",
language = "English",
volume = "132",
pages = "18--25",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Epidemiology",
issn = "0895-4356",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc",
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Categorization of changes in the Oxford Knee Score after Total Knee Replacement
T2 - An interpretive tool developed from a dataset of 46,094 replacements
AU - Mikkelsen, Mette
AU - Gao, Anqi
AU - Ingelsrud, Lina Holm
AU - Beard, David
AU - Troelsen, Anders
AU - Price, Andrew
N1 - Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/4/1
Y1 - 2021/4/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to create an interpretive categorical classification for the transition in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) change score (ΔOKS) using the anchor-based method.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Registry data from 46,094 total knee replacements from the year 2014/15, were accessed via the Health and Social Care Information Center official website. Data included preoperative and 6-month follow-up OKS and response to the transition anchor question. Categories were determined using Gaussian approximation probability and k-fold cross-validation.RESULTS: Four categories were identified with the corresponding ΔOKS intervals: "1. much better" (≥16), "2. a little better" (7-15), "3. about the same" (1-6), and "4. much worse" (≤0) based on the anchor questions' original five categories. The mean 10-fold cross-validation error was 0.35 OKS points (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.63). Sensitivity ranged from 0.34 to 0.68; specificity ranged from 0.74 to 0.95.CONCLUSION: We have categorized the change score into a clinically meaningful classification. We argue it should be an addition to the continuous OKS outcome to contextualize the results in a way more applicable to the shared decision-making process and for interpreting research results.
AB - OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to create an interpretive categorical classification for the transition in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) change score (ΔOKS) using the anchor-based method.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Registry data from 46,094 total knee replacements from the year 2014/15, were accessed via the Health and Social Care Information Center official website. Data included preoperative and 6-month follow-up OKS and response to the transition anchor question. Categories were determined using Gaussian approximation probability and k-fold cross-validation.RESULTS: Four categories were identified with the corresponding ΔOKS intervals: "1. much better" (≥16), "2. a little better" (7-15), "3. about the same" (1-6), and "4. much worse" (≤0) based on the anchor questions' original five categories. The mean 10-fold cross-validation error was 0.35 OKS points (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.63). Sensitivity ranged from 0.34 to 0.68; specificity ranged from 0.74 to 0.95.CONCLUSION: We have categorized the change score into a clinically meaningful classification. We argue it should be an addition to the continuous OKS outcome to contextualize the results in a way more applicable to the shared decision-making process and for interpreting research results.
KW - Interpretive tool
KW - Knee replacement
KW - Oxford Knee Score
KW - Patient-reported outcome
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85098681953&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.007
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.007
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 33301905
VL - 132
SP - 18
EP - 25
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
SN - 0895-4356
ER -