Psychometric Properties of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for People With Ulnar Nerve Entrapment at the Elbow: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically review, critically appraise, and synthesize evidence on the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for people with ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow (UNE). METHODS: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were searched for studies reporting on the psychometric properties of the PROMs used to assess pain, disability, and quality of life of people with UNE. Relevant data were extracted based on the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments 2018 checklist. Two authors independently rated the quality and risk of bias of the studies. A qualitative synthesis was performed according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines. The results were categorized based on the identified PROMs, and all the psychometric properties were summarized and presented. RESULTS: Eight included studies had a quality score of very good or higher. Among all the included PROMs, the Patient-Rated Ulnar Nerve Evaluation (PRUNE) was comprehensively evaluated in 4 studies and had high reliability, appropriate correlation to the physical component summary score of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (r = -0.68), excellent content (cognitive interviews), structural (factor analysis) and discriminative validities, and high responsiveness. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire was assessed in 5 studies and had appropriate properties, showing a high correlation with the 8-Item Short-Form Health Survey (r = 0.77) and PRUNE (r = 0.75) and moderate responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The PRUNE was the most specific to UNE, had the most supporting studies and evidence of excellent reliability, validity, and responsiveness and therefore was the preferred PROM. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire demonstrated more limited validation across 5 studies and had moderate responsiveness. Information on other included PROMs was limited in terms of psychometric properties. IMPACT: This study provides insight into which PROM is potentially more suitable for measuring outcomes related to UNE.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".