Reversed palmaris longus muscle: Anatomical variant - case report and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
R outine dissection of the left upper extremity of an 82-year-old Caucasian female cadaver, performed in the Department of Anatomy at the University of Saskatchewan (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan), revealed a rare variation in the anatomy of the palmaris longus (PL) muscle.On dissection and examination, it was discovered that the PL of the left upper extremity of this cadaver was 'reversed' -with the proximal portion being tendinous and the distal portion being muscular.Examination of the upper extremity showed no signs of atrophy or hypertrophy, nor median or ulnar nerve entrapment in the left upper extremity.The cadaver's medical history, occupation and handedness were unknown.No anatomical variations were noted in the right upper extremity of this cadaver.In the present case, the PL originated at the common flexor origin from the medial epicondyle.However, the origin was tendinous -a long thin tendon, instead of the normally observed PL muscle fibres.Two-thirds down the forearm, the PL structure became more muscular in nature, with a muscle belly that spanned the distal one-third of the forearm.At the distal insertion of the PL, at the level of the wrist, the muscle fibres became tendinomembranous and continued into the palmar aponeurosis where they ultimately terminated (Figure 1).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".