A Screening Method Using Anomaly Detection on a Smartphone for Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Diagnostic Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a medical condition caused by compression of the median nerve in the carpal tunnel due to aging or overuse of the hand. The symptoms include numbness of the fingers and atrophy of the thenar muscle. Thenar atrophy recovers slowly postoperatively; therefore, early diagnosis and surgery are important. While physical examinations and nerve conduction studies are used to diagnose CTS, problems with the diagnostic ability and equipment, respectively, exist. Despite research on a CTS-screening app that uses a tablet and machine learning, problems with the usage rate of tablets and data collection for machine learning remain. OBJECTIVE: To make data collection for machine learning easier and more available, we developed a screening app for CTS using a smartphone and an anomaly detection algorithm, aiming to examine our system as a useful screening tool for CTS. METHODS: In total, 36 participants were recruited, comprising 36 hands with CTS and 27 hands without CTS. Participants controlled the character in our app using their thumbs. We recorded the position of the thumbs and time; generated screening models that classified CTS and non-CTS using anomaly detection and an autoencoder; and calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Participants with and without CTS were classified with 94% sensitivity, 67% specificity, and an AUC of 0.86. When dividing the data by direction, the model with data in the same direction as the thumb opposition had the highest AUC of 0.99, 92% sensitivity, and 100% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Our app could reveal the difficulty of thumb opposition for patients with CTS and screen for CTS with high sensitivity and specificity. The app is highly accessible because of the use of smartphones and can be easily enhanced by anomaly detection.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".