ArticleBMJ neurology open2024
Tolerability of electrodiagnostic studies in patients: a prospective study.
Article in BMJ neurology open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noninvasive Assessment of the Ulnar Nerve in the Upper Extremity Using Machine Learning.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Needle Electrolysis Versus Surgery for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Traumatic Upper Extremity Nerve Lesions in Children: High-Resolution Nerve Ultrasound Can Improve Surgical Outcome.Journal of brachial plexus and peripheral nerve injury · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Nerve conduction study (NCS) and electromyography (EMG) are electrodiagnostic studies that are highly tolerated by patients despite their nature of causing pain and discomfort. However, few studies have focused on the true tolerability of these procedures in patients. This study aimed to determine the true tolerance rate of NCS and EMG in patient populations and the factors that might be associated with them. Methods: Participants scheduled for electrodiagnostic studies were prospectively recruited between March 2023 and September 2023. After completion of the study, the physicians completed a questionnaire on each patient's tolerance of the studies. Results: Of the 103 patients enrolled in the study, 98 were able to tolerate both tests, and 5 patients were intolerant to 1 or both tests. The overall tolerance rate of NCS and EMG was 95.1% (0.951, 95% CI 0.897 to 0.981). Age, sex, ethnicity, the type of NCS performed and the type of EMG performed were not associated with NCS or EMG intolerance. Conclusion: Most patients tolerated the NCS and EMG; however, a small percentage of patients were intolerant. Clinicians should recognise the intolerance of certain patients when introducing and performing electrodiagnostic tests.
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.