ArticlePain and therapy2023
The Occipital Nerves Applied Strain Test to Support Occipital Neuralgia Diagnosis.
Article in Pain and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOccipital neuralgia (ON) is a disabling cephalalgia form with demanding diagnostic workflow. We report the description and reliability analyses of the occipital nerves-applied strain (ONAS) test for occipital neuralgia (ON) early-stage diagnosis in cephalalgia patients.
methodsIn a retrospective and observational study, we evaluated, among n = 163 consecutive cephalalgia patients, the sensitivity, specificity, and prior probability [positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values] of the ONAS test against two reference tests (occipital nerve anesthetic block and the painDETECT questionnaire). Multinomial logistic regression (MLR) and χ
resultsONAS test showed sensitivity and specificity of 81 and 18%, respectively, against the painDETECT and of 94 and 46%, respectively, against the block test. PPV was > 70% against both tests, while NPV was 81% against the block test and 26% against the painDETECT. Interrater agreement Cohen's kappa was excellent. Significant association (χ
conclusionsThe ONAS test showed satisfactory reliability among cephalalgia patients; thus, it might be considered a valuable early stage tool for ON diagnosis in these patients.
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.