MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405902706 · doi:10.1186/s12891-024-08246-8

Sex-differences in the risk of carpal tunnel syndrome: results from a large Ontario, Canada worker cohort

2024· article· en· W4405902706 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fanni R. Eros, Paul A. Demers, Jeavana Sritharan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Nerve Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOccupational Cancer Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarpal tunnel syndromeSports medicineCohortOrthopedic surgeryEpidemiologyRheumatologyCohort studyRehabilitationCarpal tunnel releasePhysical therapyDemographyFamily medicineInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a prevalent cumulative strain injury associated with occupational risk factors such as vibration, repetitive and forceful wrist movements, and awkward wrist postures. This study aimed to identify Ontario workers at elevated risk for CTS and to explore sex differences in CTS risk among workers. The Occupational Disease Surveillance System (ODSS) links accepted lost time compensation claims to health administrative databases. CTS cases were identified from physician billing (Ontario Health Insurance Plan) records and defined as at least one record for CTS surgery (fee code N290) between 2002 and 2020. A 3-year washout period and restricted follow-up period of 3 years were applied. A total of 792,769 workers were included in the analytical cohort. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for CTS by occupation and industry, adjusted for age and birth year, stratified by sex. A total of 3,224 CTS cases among females (f) and 2,992 cases among males (m) were identified in the cohort. We observed elevated risks of CTS in many occupations requiring repetitive and forceful manual work: slaughtering and meat cutting, canning, curing and packing (HRf = 2.28, 95%CI = 1.42–3.68; HRm = 1.95, 95%CI = 1.33–2.85); welding and flame cutting (HRf = 1.83, 95%CI = 1.01–3.32; HRm = 1.65, 95%CI = 1.35–2.01); motor vehicle fabricating and assembling (HRf = 2.14, 95%CI = 1.74–2.62; HRm = 2.43, 95%CI = 2.04–2.89); and packaging (HRf = 2.06, 95%CI = 1.43–2.97; HRm = 1.82, 95%CI = 1.12–2.98). Elevated risks were observed among males employed as nursing aides and orderlies (HRm = 1.72, 95%CI = 1.13–2.62), in mining (HRm = 1.57, 95%CI = 1.01–2.45), and in construction (HRm = 1.32, 95%CI = 1.19–1.47). Elevated risks were observed among females in mineral, metal, chemical processing (HRf = 1.58, 95%CI = 1.27–1.97), textile processing (HRf = 1.89, 95%CI = 1.22–2.94), wood machining (HRf = 2.84, 95%CI = 1.47–5.45), and females employed as janitors, charworkers and cleaners (HRf = 1.50, 95%CI = 1.32–1.71). Findings by industry were consistent with occupation results. The risk of CTS varied by occupation, industry, and sex in this large cohort. Workers engaged in highly repetitive and forceful manual work were at elevated CTS risk, highlighting the need to further understand and reduce ergonomic hazards among identified groups. Future studies should also explore CTS risk by sex, with a focus on female workers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicPeripheral Nerve DisordersFrench-language works237,207