Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36106171›Full record

ArticleOrthopedic reviews2022

Assessment of Motor Function in Peripheral Nerve Injury and Recovery.

Albin John, Stephen Rossettie, John Rafael, Cameron Cox, Ivica Ducic, Brendan Mackay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Albin JohnSurgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.
Stephen RossettieOrthopedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.
John RafaelInternal Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.
Cameron CoxOrthopedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.
Ivica DucicPlastic Surgery, The George Washington University.
Brendan MackayOrthopedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Peripheral nerve injuries can be difficult to diagnose, treat, and monitor given their highly variable presentation. When the status of nerves is not accurately assessed, treatment may be delayed or overlooked and can result in lasting functional deficits. As our understanding of nerve repair and generation evolves, so will tools for evaluating both the functional and morphological status of peripheral nerves. Objective: There is currently no single article which provides a detailed, comprehensive view of the literature comparing the clinical utility of various assessment modalities. Furthermore, there is no consensus on the optimal assessment algorithm for peripheral nerve injuries. Methods: We performed a literature review using a comprehensive combination of keywords and search algorithm. The search was focused on clinical data regarding the assessment of peripheral nerves Results: This review may help to determine the appropriate tools that are currently available for monitoring nerve function both pre and postoperatively. Additionally, the review demonstrates possible roles and areas of improvement for each tool used to assess motor function. Conclusion: As surgeons work to improve treatments for peripheral nerve injury and dysfunction, identifying the most appropriate existing measures of success and future directions for improved algorithms could lead to improved patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Functional AssessmentNerve Assessment ToolPeripheral Nerve InjuryRecover

Identifiers

PMID36106171
PMCPMC9469044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.