MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411234781 · doi:10.7759/cureus.85854

A Comparative Study of the Presence of the Palmaris Longus Tendon Using Physical and Ultrasound Examination

2025· article· en· W4411234781 on OpenAlexaff
Hasan Al-Ali, Nour Gamgoum, Michael Atalla, Andrew Yacoub, A Skiredj, Youssef Skiredj, Haider Hilal, Tarek Alambrouk, James Coey

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Vibration on Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical examinationTendonUltrasoundAnatomyOrthodonticsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The palmaris longus muscle (PLM), located in the forearm's anterior compartment, plays an essential role in wrist flexion. Its tendon is often used for grafting because of its accessibility and minimal function. However, its anatomy varies, with congenital absence being the most common variation. This study aims to detect the incidence of the palmaris longus tendon (PLT) and compare physical examination methods with standard ultrasonography, as previous studies have only utilized physical examinations. Methods In this study, 61 participants were examined bilaterally (122 wrists) using three different physical examination methods: the Schaeffer, Thompson, and Mishra I tests. The ultrasonography test was conducted by a single observer using a GE LOGIQ e ultrasound system (GE HealthCare Technologies, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), equipped with a linear transducer with a frequency range of 12-15 Hz, attached transversely to the anterior distal forearm. The tendon was visualized anterior to the median nerve, medial to the flexor carpi radialis, and superficial to the flexor retinaculum. To assess the difference between physical examination and ultrasound, statistical analyses were conducted on subgroups using a t-test. Additionally, PLT incidence was evaluated according to gender, ethnicity, and hand dominance. Results On ultrasound examination, the PLT was detected in 72.13% of wrists bilaterally (n = 88), 5.74% unilaterally (n = 7), and was absent in 22.13% of the 122 wrists examined (n = 27). Physical examination methods detected an average of 56.28% bilaterally (n = 68.66), 6.56% unilaterally (n = 8), and 37.16% as absent (n = 45.33). Total detection by ultrasound was 77.87% (n = 95), while the physical examination average was 62.84% (n = 76.66). Overall, there is a significant difference between the physical examination methods and ultrasonography in detecting PLT, with ultrasonography demonstrating greater accuracy. It should also be noted that the prevalence of PLT is not affected by gender. Conclusion Ultrasonography is crucial in clinical settings to confirm the presence of the PLT, even when a physical examination is inconclusive. Physical and ultrasound approaches can, therefore, be combined to avoid producing incorrect negative results when locating the PLT for tendon grafting.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicEffects of Vibration on HealthFrench-language works237,207