SynthesisBMC surgery2026
"Outcome measures in Iranian studies of carpal tunnel syndrome surgery: a systematic review".
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most prevalent peripheral nerve compression neuropathy. Its annual global incidence is approximately 2.3%, while prevalence estimates in Iran are around 17%. Surgery is typically recommended when conservative treatment fails or motor weakness is present. Despite numerous Iranian studies on CTS surgery, outcome assessment methods remain inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the tools and methodologies used in Iranian research to report postoperative outcomes.
methodsMajor databases were searched (1996–2025) for Iranian CTS surgery studies (≥ 3-week follow-up). We extracted study design, sample size, follow-up duration, surgical technique, and outcome measures. Outcome reporting was summarized using descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) and grouped into Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), physical examination findings (e.g., grip strength), and electrodiagnostic parameters for structured comparison.
resultsTwenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. The Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire was used in 45.5% of studies, pain was assessed with the Visual Analog Scale in 59.1%, and grip and pinch strength were evaluated in 40.9% and 13.6%, respectively. Electrodiagnostic testing was performed preoperatively in 81.8% of studies, but only 18% assessed postoperative changes. Reporting of return to work, scar length, and surgical technique was inconsistent.
conclusionsIranian CTS research shows substantial variability in study design and outcome assessment. Although the volume of research is increasing, the methodological quality remains suboptimal, with a high prevalence of risk of bias in RCTs and poor quality in observational studies. The limited use of standardized instruments and inconsistent reporting may reduce comparability and clinical relevance.
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.