Caracterización del dolor en pacientes con síndrome del túnel del carpo según criterios electromiográficos de gravedad
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) vary greatly and can depend on the severity of the clinical symptoms. AIMS: To characterise the description and self-perception of pain in a sample of patients with CTS and to determine whether that perception of pain differs among the patients on the basis of electrodiagnostic severity criteria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The sample consisted of 92 females with CTS, who were classified as having mild, moderate or severe CTS, bearing in mind electrodiagnostic criteria. Different instruments were used in the study: a numerical scale (0-10) to evaluate the intensity of the pain, the McGill questionnaire to classify the descriptors that represent the quality of the pain, and the Boston questionnaire for assessing symptom severity and disability. RESULTS: The most representative descriptors were the presence of tingling (92%), heaviness (67%) and a feeling of swelling (64%). The women with mild CTS showed a longer history of pain than those with moderate and severe CTS (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences among the intensity of the pain, the disability questionnaire and most of the descriptors on the McGill questionnaire between the different groups of mild, moderate or severe CTS. The women with severe CTS described the pain as being periodic, repetitive and terribly unpleasant more often than those with mild or moderate CTS (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of tingling and the feeling of heaviness are the most prevalent symptoms of CTS. There are no great differences in the quality of the pain among cases of mild, moderate or severe CTS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".