ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2026
Comparative Analysis of Methods for Obtaining Median Nerve Cross-Sectional Area Using Ultrasound.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Quantitative Assessment of Peripheral Nerve Echogenicity in Children and Adolescents Aged 2-17 Years: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Ultrasound Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
backgroundUltrasound measurement of median nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) is widely used in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) diagnosis. This study compared 3 common measurement methods: A-B, Ellipse, and Trace to evaluate their reliability and accuracy.
methodsTwo observers (experienced hand surgeon and orthopedic surgery resident) measured median nerve CSA in 10 patients with suspected CTS. Each method was applied in standard and zoom-enhanced views: A-B method (measuring major/minor axes), Ellipse method (fitting ellipse to nerve boundaries), and Trace method (manually tracing nerve boundary). Measurements were compared to ImageJ software analysis as reference standard. Reliability and accuracy were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland-Altman analysis, and standard detectable difference (SDD).
resultsAll methods showed high reliability (ICC: 0.940-0.994) but consistently underestimated CSA compared to ImageJ (12.15 ± 5.13 mm
conclusionAll 3 ultrasound methods demonstrated high reliability in measuring median nerve CSA, with Trace method showing modest advantages in accuracy and precision. Zoom enhanced views improved interrater reliability but reduced measurement accuracy. Based on our findings, we recommend nonzoom Trace method for consistent longitudinal measurements, though maintaining proficiency in one selected method is more important. Further validation with larger studies is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2.
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.