Diagnostisk nøyaktighet av kliniske tester og korrelasjon av Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index ved symptomatisk unilateral supraspinatustendinopati; en tverrsnitt studie med muskelskjelettultralyd som referansetest.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Symptomatic supraspinatus tendinopathy is considered to be one of the most common pathologies affecting the shoulder and a challenge to diagnose in primary clinical setting. The manual therapist has a responsibility to evaluate what is the best practice from both the individual patient- and societal perspective. This requires reliable and valid measurements. Aim and objectives The aim of the study is to evaluate the diagnostics accuracy of Hawkins-Kennedy, Empty can and Neer in patients with unilateral supraspinatus tendinopathy and compare WORC with objective findings. Material and method Cross-sectional study with ultrasonography measure of the difference in tendon thickness as a reference test. 16 participants were included. Tendinopathy of supraspinatus was defined as pathologic increased tendon thickness >0,8mm compared with asymptomatic shoulder. The clinical tests were performed on symptomatic and asymptomatic shoulder. The observer was blinded in ultrasound measurements and WORC. Results Of 27 participants with tentative tendinopathy, 11 were excluded. 16 participant included had unilateral increased tendon thickness >0,8mm. Empty can revealed sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 94%, LR+ 13,88 LR- 0,13. Hawkins-Kennedy revealed sensitivity of 69%, specificity of 75%, LR+ 2,75, LR- 0,41. Neer revealed sensitivity of 63%, specificity of 69%, LR+ 1,99 LR- 0,54. There were found no relationship between WORC and the tendon thickness >0,8mm. Conclusion Empty can revealed good diagnostic accuracy. Hawkins-Kennedy and Neer revealed limited diagnostic accuracy and have limited value of differentially diagnosing pathologies. Increased tendon thickness >0,8mm was a valid measurement, but increased tendon thickness over >0,8mm had no relationship with, pain, function or quality of life measured with WORC. More studies are required to make a conclusion.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".