MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313427604 · doi:10.1093/jsprm/snac022

Prospective cohort study of electrodiagnostic abnormality characterization in pronator quadratus associated with end-to-side nerve transfers for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow

2023· article· en· W4313427604 on OpenAlexaff
Raahulan Rathagirishnan, Benjamin Ritsma, Jessica Trier, Parham Daneshvar, Michael Hendry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Protocols and Research Methodologies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNerve Injury and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUlnar neuropathyMedicineUlnar nerveElbowProspective cohort studyMedian nerveGrip strengthSurgeryElectromyographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE) is a common compressive neuropathy that affects the median nerve. Conservative management for mild-to-moderate UNE is an important first step, but generally, develops a plateau in benefit. A specific technique, referred to as a supercharged ‘end-to-side’ (SETS) nerve transfer can successfully restore pinch, fine motor dexterity and grip strength. A pre-surgical workup flow for UNE patients has been developed, which includes electrodiagnostic (EDX) studies completed to assess the recipient ulnar nerve and the donor median nerve to pronator quadratus (PQ). There is little evidence that the assessment of the PQ muscle is necessary in a non-traumatic setting. A prospective cohort study of patients who present with clinical and/or EDX evidence of ulnar compressive neuropathy, with clinical evidence of motor dysfunction, was assessed for health PQ donor in routine pre-operative workup. We aim to provide justification that SETS for UNE should not be delayed to acquire PQ EDX studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.177
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical Protocols and Research MethodologiesSame topicNerve Injury and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207