Assessing Weakness in Patients with Ulnar Neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use of a custom intrinsic hand dynamometer (HD) with that of a standard pinch dynamometer (PD) in assessing strength in patients with ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. DESIGN: Nine patients (age, 53 ± 3 yrs) with clinical and electrophysiological features of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow with conduction block (CB) were studied. All underwent bilateral ulnar motor nerve conduction studies recording from the first dorsal interosseous and a quantitative measurement of strength of the first dorsal interosseous using a custom-made HD and a standard PD. RESULTS: The maximal strength of the ulnar neuropathy at the elbow-affected side (16.2 ± 8.0 N) was found to be significantly lower than that of the unaffected side (27.9 ± 11.2 N), as measured by HD. Strength differences were not significant between the affected (62.7 ± 26.4 N) and unaffected sides (48.0 ± 20.5 N) using PD. HD force decrement (in comparison with the unaffected limb) correlated strongly with CB percentage (r = 0.74). No relationship was found between PD and CB (r = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HD was better able to measure the weakness of affected muscles than did PD, and its results correlated well with the extent of electrophysiological CB. Therefore, a custom HD would provide a better indication of disease severity, progression, or improvement in strength in studies of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow with CB.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".