ArticleJournal of biomechanics2025
Thumb motion is not the same as first carpometacarpal joint motion.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2025. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thumb motion is a key outcome metric for assessing disease progression or treatment efficacy. A literature review found nearly 25 % of recent papers incorrectly described their motion measurements as those of the first carpometacarpal (CMC) joint, when in fact their technology was only capable of measuring thumb motion. The aim of this manuscript is to clarify the importance of the accurate terminology and to rigorously examine the potential error by comparing thumb motion and CMC joint motion. Computed tomography (CT) images from 46 healthy subjects were analyzed using 3D markerless bone registration techniques to compute thumb rotation (first metacarpal (MC1) relative to the radius) and CMC joint rotation (MC1 relative to trapezium). We found thumb rotation was a poor measure of CMC joint rotation. For example, at thumb rotations of 20°, the true CMC joint rotations ranged from 3° to 30°. On average, thumb rotation over predicted CMC rotation by approximately 10°, with 95 % Limits of Agreement ranging from 30° (over estimating CMC joint motion) to -11° (underestimating CMC joint motion). Importantly, the character of the data demonstrated that CMC motion cannot be predicted from thumb motion. 3D CMC joint motion can only be assessed with skeletal imaging technologies; goniometers and skin-based markers can, at best, only measure thumb motion. Referring to goniometer and skin marker measurements as CMC joint motion is incorrect. It is critical that investigators be precise in their reporting of thumb motion versus CMC joint motion, especially when reporting interventions for thumb pathologies.
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.