Which hand is worse? Concordance between patient perception and electrodiagnostic results in carpal tunnel syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In patients with clinically diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) the more symptomatic hand may be different from the more severely affected hand on electrodiagnostic testing. This study aims to determine the level of agreement which should be expected between these measures and consequently the level of suspicion for co-occurring pathology which is warranted if there is discordance. METHODS: This was a single center retrospective review of 252 patients referred for upper extremity electrodiagnostic evaluation who were diagnosed subsequently with CTS. Comparison was made between the patient's perceived worst side and the more abnormal side on electrodiagnostic studies. RESULTS: We found a significant level of agreement (κ = 0.676) between patient symptoms and electrodiagnostic testing when identifying the side with more severe CTS. CONCLUSIONS: Discordance between patient perception and electrodiagnostic results regarding which hand is affected more severely in patients with CTS should alert the clinician to possible coexisting nonneurologic pathology and prompt regional musculoskeletal examination as indicated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".