ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Noninvasive Assessment of the Ulnar Nerve in the Upper Extremity Using Machine Learning.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop a machine learning algorithm trained on ultrasound images of the cubital tunnel that can be used to automatically identify, segment, and measure the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the ulnar nerve. Methods: Control subjects and patients were scanned using a Fujifilm-SonoSite ultrasound system, equipped with a high-frequency linear array probe by a trained technician or physician. The ulnar nerve was identified and segmented in individual frames using a custom graphical user interface application. A convolutional neural network (YOLOv8) was then trained on these images to automatically detect the ulnar nerve, resulting in a binary map. The CSA and Dice score were then computed using the binary map of the nerve outline from the prediction and ground truth to assess the prediction accuracy. Results: In total, 34 subjects (11 patients and 23 controls) were imaged with ultrasound. A total of 2,011 ultrasound grayscale images were extracted, and the ulnar nerve was segmented from these scans. In total, 1,286 images from 23 subjects (seven patients and 16 controls) were used to train the model, 425 images from five subjects (two patients and three controls) were used for validation, and 300 images from six subjects (two patients and four controls) for testing. The machine learning model (YOLOv8) resulted in an average Dice score of 0.90 with 296 images (99%) achieving a Dice score above 0.75. When comparing the CSA predictions from the machine learning model to the area derived from the ground truth, the mean difference and mean absolute difference were 1.78 (13.80%) mm Conclusions: Ultrasound is an emerging noninvasive modality for the diagnosis of cubital tunnel syndrome. However, its implementation remains challenging because of operator dependence and technical variability. This work establishes a foundational step toward fully automated, operator-independent ultrasound assessment of the ulnar nerve. Type of study/level of evidence: Diagnostic III.
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.