Impact of shoulder internal rotation on ulnar nerve excursion and strain in embalmed cadavers. A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DESIGN: Laboratory study, repeated-measures design. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the substitution of shoulder internal rotation for external rotation during the upper limb neurodynamic test (ULNT3) evokes a comparable ulnar nerve excursion and strain in embalmed cadavers. Shoulder external rotation is a primary movement component of the ULNT3. It has been suggested that shoulder internal rotation may provide a similar load to the nervous system. There are no data to either support or negate this claim. METHODS: Excursion and strain were measured in the ulnar nerve of six embalmed cadavers during the traditional ULNT3 and an experimental maneuver using shoulder internal rotation. RESULTS: The total means±SD of excursion for the traditional and experimental maneuvers were 2·11±0·89 and 2·09±0·92 mm, respectively. The total means±SD of strain for the traditional and experimental maneuvers were 5·274±2·223 and 5·241±2·308%, respectively. A very strong correlation (r = 0·98) was shown to exist between maneuvers and this relationship was determined to be significant (P = 0·001). DISCUSSION: The results of this study provide evidence that there is no appreciable difference in excursion or strain when substituting shoulder internal rotation for external rotation during the ULNT3. Patients who exhibit limitation of shoulder external rotation mobility may benefit from this substitution when presenting with signs of ulnar nerve pathodynamics. Further research involving patients will be needed to assess the validity of the experimental maneuver for clinical application.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".