ArticleClinical rheumatology2026
Assessing active thumb palmar and radial abduction in persons with thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis via intermetacarpal distance methods: an exploration of validity, reliability, and precision.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC1 OA) is a prevalent and disabling rheumatological condition. One impairment commonly described in the context of CMC1 OA is a loss of radial (RABD) and palmar (PABD) thumb abduction. Traditional goniometric measures are unreliable and poorly correlated with functional limitations. The intermetacarpal distance (IMD) method, using digital calipers, shows promise for better reliability, but its validity and the feasibility of using tape measures remain untested.
objectiveTo evaluate the construct validity, test-retest reliability, and precision of IMD-based thumb abduction measurements using calipers and tape in individuals with non-operative, radiographically confirmed CMC1 OA.
methodsForty participants underwent standardized IMD assessments using both caliper and tape methods across two sessions, 2 weeks apart. Three trials were recorded per session. Reliability (ICC
resultsReliability (ICC
conclusionCaliper and tape-based IMD measurements offer similar reliability, but averaging multiple trials improves precision. RABD-IMD methods demonstrate moderate construct validity, supporting their use in clinical assessment of CMC1 OA. Standardized, repeatable IMD assessments may enhance monitoring and care planning in thumb CMC1 OA. Key Points In persons with carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: • Caliper and tape intermetacarpal distance measures of thumb radial and palmar abduction demonstrate excellent test-rest reliability and acceptable precision. • Averaging two or three intermetacarpal distance measurements is recommended over a single measure due to superior precision. • Radial abduction (via the intermetacarpal distance) is strongly associated with self-reported disability and may be more clinically meaningful than palmar abduction.
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.