ArticleCureus2025
Reliability and Responsiveness of the Hand20 Questionnaire in Thumb Carpometacarpal Joint Osteoarthritis: A Pilot Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) joint osteoarthritis significantly impairs hand function and quality of life, particularly in older adults. Reliable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for assessing disease impact and evaluating treatment efficacy. The Hand20 questionnaire, widely used for upper extremity conditions, has demonstrated strong reliability and responsiveness. However, its specific utility in thumb CMC joint osteoarthritis remains unexplored. Methods This retrospective study included 20 patients diagnosed with thumb CMC joint osteoarthritis. Hand20 scores were collected at baseline, three months, and six months. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) from a mixed-effects model. Responsiveness was assessed using the effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). Paired t-tests were used to analyze changes in scores over time. Results The mean Hand20 score decreased from 33.50 at baseline to 18.77 at three months and 15.93 at six months. The ICC was 0.672 (95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.406-0.823), indicating moderate-to-good reliability. Responsiveness was moderate at three months (ES: -0.650, SRM: -0.708) and large at six months (ES: -0.776, SRM: -0.940). Paired t-tests showed significant reductions in Hand20 scores over time, confirming progressive improvements (
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.