SynthesisIndustrial health2015
A systematic review of diagnostic performance of quantitative tests to assess musculoskeletal disorders in hand-arm vibration syndrome.
Synthesis in Industrial health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement of muscle passive stiffness in vibration-exposed groundskeepers.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2026Article
- Adverse health manifestations in the hands of vibration exposed carpenters - a cross sectional study.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2021Article
- Prevalence of hand-arm vibration syndrome among tyre shop workers in Kelantan, Malaysia.Journal of occupational health · 2019Article
- International consensus criteria for diagnosing and staging hand-arm vibration syndrome.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose was to systematically review the published reports for the clinical utility of quantitative objective tests commonly used for diagnosing musculoskeletal disorders in hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). Two reviewers independently conducted a computerized literature search in PubMed and Scopus using predefined criteria, and relevant papers were identified. The articles were screened in several stages and considered for final inclusion. Quality of the selected papers was evaluated by a modified QUADAS tool. Relevant data were extracted as necessary. For this review, only 4 relevant studies could be identified for detailed examination. Grip strength, pinch strength, and Purdue pegboard tests were commonly used with their reported sensitivity and specificity ranging between 1.7 to 65.7% and 65.2 to 100%, 1.7 to 40% and 94 to 100%, and 44.8 to 85% and 78 to 95%, respectively. A considerable difference across the studies was observed with respect to patient and control populations, diagnostic performance and cut-off values of different tests. Overall, currently available English-language limited literature do not provide enough evidence in favour of the application of grip strength and pinch strength tests for diagnosing musculoskeletal injuries in HAVS; Purdue pegboard test seems to have some diagnostic value in evaluating impaired dexterity in HAVS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.