# Upper-body yoga × improved grip strength in carpal tunnel syndrome Verdict 2916 · Evidence Check Stored-material review date: Not recorded Original evidence cut-off: 2026-08-26 Review-criteria version: 1.0 Public page/material preparation date: 2026-10-09 Clinical papers were not read directly; existing review summaries were checked. No new clinical-literature search was performed. Unverified does not mean that research is absent or that there is no effect. ## Assessment scope - Population: Improved grip strength and pain in carpal tunnel syndrome - Ingredient, formulation and route: An eight-week yoga program comprising 11 postures for strengthening, stretching and balancing upper-body joints, plus relaxation - Dose: Only the historical program conditions of eight weeks, 11 postures and relaxation are retained. Details of actual attendance, frequency and cumulative exposure remain unverified; no instructions on implementation, dose or recommendations are provided. - Comparator: Wrist-splint active control - Measured outcome: Original before-and-after grip-strength values in mmHg at eight weeks; details of between-group effects, denominators, variance and CI remain unverified - Duration: The original eight-week trial. Direct data on persistence after treatment and long-term treatment effects remain unverified. - Questions outside this scope: Extending grip and pain findings to other tests, nerve recovery or all symptom outcomes; Calculating new between-group effects, CI, changes or ratios from original within-group values; Establishing effects for general yoga, all patients, long-term treatment or absence of harm; Instructions for exercise, yoga, splints, medicines, self-care or treatment substitution; Counting the same report, population, wrists, time points, two tables or outcomes as new independent trials or participants ## Checklist items ### N01 · What are the selected subclaim and the question and record pointers? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The selected stored summary states 'Improved grip strength'; the selected claim and its assessment record are distinguished. Other stored claims and the original parent context are retained without creating a new main claim, split or certification of independence. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. The selected source wording, question and record pointers, and parent and sibling context. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; The selected source wording, question and record pointers, and parent and sibling context. - Required materials and conditions: The selected source wording, question and record pointers, and parent and sibling context. - Materials to obtain first: The selected source wording, question and record pointers, and parent and sibling context. - Further research: If the original question or materials change, record the distinction between the existing scope and a separate question. - Conditions for verification: What are the selected subclaim and the question and record pointers? The selected source wording, question and record pointers, and parent and sibling context. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the selected subclaim and the question and record pointers? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N02 · How are the subclaim's actual grade and note, and absent score, status and axes, retained? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The selected subclaim's grade B and note 'Positive in one small trial.' are retained. score, status and axes are absent from the original subclaim record; null and field absence are recorded. The parent's grade C, 50 points and axes are separate context. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. The selected subclaim's actual fields and the parent's separate actual values. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; The selected subclaim's actual fields and the parent's separate actual values. - Required materials and conditions: The selected subclaim's actual fields and the parent's separate actual values. - Materials to obtain first: The selected subclaim's actual fields and the parent's separate actual values. - Further research: If the subclaim is corrected, retain the full original text before the change and a record of the correction event. - Conditions for verification: How are the subclaim's actual grade and note, and absent score, status and axes, retained? The selected subclaim's actual fields and the parent's separate actual values. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How are the subclaim's actual grade and note, and absent score, status and axes, retained? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not fill absent subclaim score/status/axes fields with the parent's grade C, 50 points or axes. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N03 · What are the parent assessment, axes, safety label, null, false and empty values? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The parent's grade C, 50 points, B/P/R1/I1/E+/B2 and safety label Caution are retained. precision remains null; coprimary_split, big_hard_rct and no_human_study remain false; override_reason and override_reason_en remain empty strings. The original parent assessment and cross-checking narrative are not a new review or subclaim assessment. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. The parent assessment, axes, original evaluation, history and limits of applicability. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; The parent assessment, axes, original evaluation, history and limits of applicability. - Required materials and conditions: The parent assessment, axes, original evaluation, history and limits of applicability. - Materials to obtain first: The parent assessment, axes, original evaluation, history and limits of applicability. - Further research: If separate correction materials arrive, distinguish the original values, reasons for changes and correction events. - Conditions for verification: What are the parent assessment, axes, safety label, null, false and empty values? The parent assessment, axes, original evaluation, history and limits of applicability. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the parent assessment, axes, safety label, null, false and empty values? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not turn historical defect lists, avoidability judgments or numerical criteria into a new automated score. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N04 · How are KO/EN text, dates, corrections and empty values preserved? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The parent's and subclaim's KO/EN text, verified_date 2026-08-26, the empty corrections array and the empty deliberation string are retained. The stored summary's historical evaluation is distinguished from the current preparation time. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. The actual versions of each language's original text, evidence date, corrections and history. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; The actual versions of each language's original text, evidence date, corrections and history. - Required materials and conditions: The actual versions of each language's original text, evidence date, corrections and history. - Materials to obtain first: The actual versions of each language's original text, evidence date, corrections and history. - Further research: Record a new correction as a separate event with the full original text before the change, version and reason. - Conditions for verification: How are KO/EN text, dates, corrections and empty values preserved? The actual versions of each language's original text, evidence date, corrections and history. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How are KO/EN text, dates, corrections and empty values preserved? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N05 · What was actually read, and which external materials remain unread? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The stored existing review summary was read. External abstracts, full papers, registrations, plans, SAPs, results and safety tables were not accessed. Earlier assessments and citations in the stored summary do not mean external materials were read or reviewed in this work. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Acquisition and reading scope for each material, and the locations of original results. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Acquisition and reading scope for each material, and the locations of original results. - Required materials and conditions: Acquisition and reading scope for each material, and the locations of original results. - Materials to obtain first: Acquisition and reading scope for each material, and the locations of original results. - Further research: If additional materials are read directly in a separate step, record the actual extent, scope, version and time. - Conditions for verification: What was actually read, and which external materials remain unread? Acquisition and reading scope for each material, and the locations of original results. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What was actually read, and which external materials remain unread? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Only the original URL is linked; link checks or certification of reading are not performed. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N06 · What are the identity, year and bibliographic details of the primary report? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The primary report is the Garfinkel et al. 1998 randomized trial, JAMA 1998;280:1601-1603, PMID 9820263. The DOI, PMCID and detailed identity of the external full paper remain unverified. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original bibliographic details and materials linking the paper to the trial and population. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original bibliographic details and materials linking the paper to the trial and population. - Required materials and conditions: Original bibliographic details and materials linking the paper to the trial and population. - Materials to obtain first: Original bibliographic details and materials linking the paper to the trial and population. - Further research: First establish whether a new report concerns the same trial and population or a different trial. - Conditions for verification: What are the identity, year and bibliographic details of the primary report? Original bibliographic details and materials linking the paper to the trial and population. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the identity, year and bibliographic details of the primary report? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N07 · How is the sharing of one report, population and outcomes across the two tables shown? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: Grip strength and pain are two stored questions from the same 1998 eight-week report and population. Phalen, sleep, Tinel, nerve conduction, the sibling table and parent context are not added as separate independent trials or participants. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Overlap information for reports, trials, people, wrists, groups, outcomes and time points. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Overlap information for reports, trials, people, wrists, groups, outcomes and time points. - Required materials and conditions: Overlap information for reports, trials, people, wrists, groups, outcomes and time points. - Materials to obtain first: Overlap information for reports, trials, people, wrists, groups, outcomes and time points. - Further research: When follow-up or companion reports are added, distinguish a shared population from independent data. - Conditions for verification: How is the sharing of one report, population and outcomes across the two tables shown? Overlap information for reports, trials, people, wrists, groups, outcomes and time points. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How is the sharing of one report, population and outcomes across the two tables shown? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: The number of material slots does not certify counts of unique clinical trials or independent participants. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N08 · What population and eligibility criteria were used for carpal tunnel syndrome? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The question concerns carpal tunnel syndrome. Detailed diagnostic criteria, age, severity, wrist-specific status and inclusion and exclusion criteria are absent from the current summary, so the findings are not extended to all patients or all wrist pain. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original information on diagnosis, recruitment, inclusion, exclusion, severity and baseline function. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original information on diagnosis, recruitment, inclusion, exclusion, severity and baseline function. - Required materials and conditions: Original information on diagnosis, recruitment, inclusion, exclusion, severity and baseline function. - Materials to obtain first: Original information on diagnosis, recruitment, inclusion, exclusion, severity and baseline function. - Further research: Application to other populations or severity levels requires direct comparative data for those populations. - Conditions for verification: What population and eligibility criteria were used for carpal tunnel syndrome? Original information on diagnosis, recruitment, inclusion, exclusion, severity and baseline function. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What population and eligibility criteria were used for carpal tunnel syndrome? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N09 · How much is known about baseline risk, representativeness and everyday exposure? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: Baseline characteristics by group, occupation and repetitive use, comorbidities, concurrent treatments, baseline tests and recruitment setting remain unverified. A population label alone does not establish individual response or suitability for the intervention. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Original information on baseline characteristics, group distributions, recruitment and concurrent exposures. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original information on baseline characteristics, group distributions, recruitment and concurrent exposures. - Required materials and conditions: Original information on baseline characteristics, group distributions, recruitment and concurrent exposures. - Materials to obtain first: Original information on baseline characteristics, group distributions, recruitment and concurrent exposures. - Further research: General application should be distinguished using data showing differences in the actual population and setting. - Conditions for verification: How much is known about baseline risk, representativeness and everyday exposure? Original information on baseline characteristics, group distributions, recruitment and concurrent exposures. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How much is known about baseline risk, representativeness and everyday exposure? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N10 · What upper-body yoga program was used in the original study? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original intervention was eight weeks of yoga with 11 postures for strengthening, stretching and balancing upper-body joints, plus relaxation. These are the study conditions of a specific supervised program, not all yoga or stretching. No new instructions on posture, intensity, breathing or timing are provided. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original information on the supervised program's identity, delivery, actual exposure, instructors and modifications. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original information on the supervised program's identity, delivery, actual exposure, instructors and modifications. - Required materials and conditions: Original information on the supervised program's identity, delivery, actual exposure, instructors and modifications. - Materials to obtain first: Original information on the supervised program's identity, delivery, actual exposure, instructors and modifications. - Further research: Differences between programs should be distinguished using direct comparative data. - Conditions for verification: What upper-body yoga program was used in the original study? Original information on the supervised program's identity, delivery, actual exposure, instructors and modifications. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What upper-body yoga program was used in the original study? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Retain only the original study exposure; do not provide instructions for exercise, yoga or self-care. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N11 · What were the original comparison conditions for the wrist-splint active control? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original comparator was a wrist splint. The trial used an active control only; wait-list or attention controls are not presented as groups that were actually used. Details of splint type, timing, actual use, instruction, expectations and differences in care remain unverified. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original information on the splint control's delivery, exposure, attention, adherence and concurrent care. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original information on the splint control's delivery, exposure, attention, adherence and concurrent care. - Required materials and conditions: Original information on the splint control's delivery, exposure, attention, adherence and concurrent care. - Materials to obtain first: Original information on the splint control's delivery, exposure, attention, adherence and concurrent care. - Further research: Link other control conditions only after distinguishing whether they were actually used and for what purpose. - Conditions for verification: What were the original comparison conditions for the wrist-splint active control? Original information on the splint control's delivery, exposure, attention, adherence and concurrent care. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What were the original comparison conditions for the wrist-splint active control? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not make recommendations on splint use, replacing exercise or choosing treatment. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N12 · What are the details of actual program exposure, adherence, discontinuation and concurrent treatment? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The eight-week duration and program components are recorded, but actual attendance, frequency, cumulative exposure, practice, splint adherence, concurrent medicines or procedures, discontinuation and modifications remain unverified. Complete individual adherence to the original program is not assumed. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Group-specific records of actual exposure, adherence, modifications, concurrent treatment and discontinuation. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Group-specific records of actual exposure, adherence, modifications, concurrent treatment and discontinuation. - Required materials and conditions: Group-specific records of actual exposure, adherence, modifications, concurrent treatment and discontinuation. - Materials to obtain first: Group-specific records of actual exposure, adherence, modifications, concurrent treatment and discontinuation. - Further research: Direct data distinguishing the assigned program from actual adherence are needed. - Conditions for verification: What are the details of actual program exposure, adherence, discontinuation and concurrent treatment? Group-specific records of actual exposure, adherence, modifications, concurrent treatment and discontinuation. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the details of actual program exposure, adherence, discontinuation and concurrent treatment? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N13 · How much is known about the randomized single-blind design and allocation procedures? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The recorded design is a randomized single-blind active-control trial. External details of sequence generation, concealment, baseline balance between groups and allocation implementation have not been read. The design label alone does not certify adequacy. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original plans and reports on sequence generation, allocation concealment, implementation and baseline balance. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original plans and reports on sequence generation, allocation concealment, implementation and baseline balance. - Required materials and conditions: Original plans and reports on sequence generation, allocation concealment, implementation and baseline balance. - Materials to obtain first: Original plans and reports on sequence generation, allocation concealment, implementation and baseline balance. - Further research: When allocation materials are added, distinguish what is known from what remains unverified. - Conditions for verification: How much is known about the randomized single-blind design and allocation procedures? Original plans and reports on sequence generation, allocation concealment, implementation and baseline balance. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How much is known about the randomized single-blind design and allocation procedures? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N14 · Is assessor blinding the same as blinding of pain responses and awareness of the intervention? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original account states that one physician, unaware of allocation, performed assessments. Details of participant and instructor blinding, pain responses, measurement procedures and differences in expectations remain unverified. Assessor blinding is not extended to every person or outcome. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original information on assessors, respondents, intervention awareness, tests, expectations and measurement procedures. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original information on assessors, respondents, intervention awareness, tests, expectations and measurement procedures. - Required materials and conditions: Original information on assessors, respondents, intervention awareness, tests, expectations and measurement procedures. - Materials to obtain first: Original information on assessors, respondents, intervention awareness, tests, expectations and measurement procedures. - Further research: Measurement, response and blinding data are needed for each outcome. - Conditions for verification: Is assessor blinding the same as blinding of pain responses and awareness of the intervention? Original information on assessors, respondents, intervention awareness, tests, expectations and measurement procedures. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Is assessor blinding the same as blinding of pain responses and awareness of the intervention? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N15 · What were the original denominators for randomization, analysis and exclusions or withdrawals? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original numbers are retained: 51 randomized, 42 analyzed and 9 withdrawn or excluded. Allocation, completion and reasons for exclusion by group, and the actual denominators for grip strength and pain, remain unverified. No new attrition rates or group counts are calculated. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Group-specific flow diagrams, inclusion and exclusion information, outcome denominators and missing data. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Group-specific flow diagrams, inclusion and exclusion information, outcome denominators and missing data. - Required materials and conditions: Group-specific flow diagrams, inclusion and exclusion information, outcome denominators and missing data. - Materials to obtain first: Group-specific flow diagrams, inclusion and exclusion information, outcome denominators and missing data. - Further research: Original materials explaining the actual analysis population for each outcome are needed. - Conditions for verification: What were the original denominators for randomization, analysis and exclusions or withdrawals? Group-specific flow diagrams, inclusion and exclusion information, outcome denominators and missing data. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What were the original denominators for randomization, analysis and exclusions or withdrawals? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not add people, wrists or repeated measurements as new participants. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N16 · What are the gaps in completer analysis, missing data and sensitivity analyses? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original limitation of analysis of 42 completers is retained. Outcomes for all randomized participants, missing data by group, exclusion reasons, imputation and sensitivity analyses remain unverified. The 9 original exclusions are not converted into 9 clinical adverse events. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Definitions of completer and full analyses, group-specific missing data, reasons, handling and sensitivity analyses. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Definitions of completer and full analyses, group-specific missing data, reasons, handling and sensitivity analyses. - Required materials and conditions: Definitions of completer and full analyses, group-specific missing data, reasons, handling and sensitivity analyses. - Materials to obtain first: Definitions of completer and full analyses, group-specific missing data, reasons, handling and sensitivity analyses. - Further research: Direct analysis materials addressing the effect of missing data after allocation are needed. - Conditions for verification: What are the gaps in completer analysis, missing data and sensitivity analyses? Definitions of completer and full analyses, group-specific missing data, reasons, handling and sensitivity analyses. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the gaps in completer analysis, missing data and sensitivity analyses? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not apply historical assessments of substantial attrition, sample size or duration as new criteria. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N17 · How are eight-week results distinguished from persistence after treatment ends? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original selected outcomes are grip strength and pain in an eight-week trial. Direct figures for persistence after treatment, recurrence and long-term function are absent from the current summary, so the findings are not extended to long-term treatment effects. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Direct information on the starting point, measurement schedule, follow-up, treatment changes and long-term tracking. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Direct information on the starting point, measurement schedule, follow-up, treatment changes and long-term tracking. - Required materials and conditions: Direct information on the starting point, measurement schedule, follow-up, treatment changes and long-term tracking. - Materials to obtain first: Direct information on the starting point, measurement schedule, follow-up, treatment changes and long-term tracking. - Further research: Persistent outcomes require adequate follow-up and direct comparative data. - Conditions for verification: How are eight-week results distinguished from persistence after treatment ends? Direct information on the starting point, measurement schedule, follow-up, treatment changes and long-term tracking. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How are eight-week results distinguished from persistence after treatment ends? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N18 · What are the outcome hierarchy and multiplicity for grip, pain, other symptoms and tests? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The recorded endpoints are eight-week grip strength and pain, plus several symptoms and tests. The precise primary, secondary and exploratory hierarchy, prespecified plans, multiplicity and analysis versions remain unverified. The selected subclaim questions are not newly certified as individually registered primary outcomes. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Original protocols, plans, outcome hierarchy, multiplicity and analysis materials. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original protocols, plans, outcome hierarchy, multiplicity and analysis materials. - Required materials and conditions: Original protocols, plans, outcome hierarchy, multiplicity and analysis materials. - Materials to obtain first: Original protocols, plans, outcome hierarchy, multiplicity and analysis materials. - Further research: Direct materials distinguishing prespecified plans from actual reporting for each outcome are needed. - Conditions for verification: What are the outcome hierarchy and multiplicity for grip, pain, other symptoms and tests? Original protocols, plans, outcome hierarchy, multiplicity and analysis materials. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the outcome hierarchy and multiplicity for grip, pain, other symptoms and tests? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N19 · How does the historical registration statement differ from actual registration verification? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original nct string states 'Not present because the study predates trial registration.' It is retained as a historical status statement, not a valid registration number. No registration search or access was performed in this work, and absence from every registration system is not newly certified. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Original public materials on contemporaneous plans, registration status and analysis documents. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original public materials on contemporaneous plans, registration status and analysis documents. - Required materials and conditions: Original public materials on contemporaneous plans, registration status and analysis documents. - Materials to obtain first: Original public materials on contemporaneous plans, registration status and analysis documents. - Further research: When planning materials are added, record the relationship between that version and the report. - Conditions for verification: How does the historical registration statement differ from actual registration verification? Original public materials on contemporaneous plans, registration status and analysis documents. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How does the historical registration statement differ from actual registration verification? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not label the string as a registration ID, inaccessible material or direct verification. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N20 · What is the original scope of 'independent funding not established'? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The funding record states that independent funding was not established; the earlier assessment says the stored summary's Funding statement was not obtained. This does not establish no sponsorship, public funding or corporate funding, and is not current external verification. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original disclosures on sponsorship, funding and provision of products or facilities. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original disclosures on sponsorship, funding and provision of products or facilities. - Required materials and conditions: Original disclosures on sponsorship, funding and provision of products or facilities. - Materials to obtain first: Original disclosures on sponsorship, funding and provision of products or facilities. - Further research: When sponsorship disclosures are added, distinguish the original unverified status from the new-information event. - Conditions for verification: What is the original scope of 'independent funding not established'? Original disclosures on sponsorship, funding and provision of products or facilities. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What is the original scope of 'independent funding not established'? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not carry the original I1 forward as current certification of funding or analytical independence. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N21 · What interests and research roles did authors, instructors and institutions have? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: Details of contracts, author-specific interests, program provision, data access, design, analysis and publication roles remain unverified. Failure to establish these details is not filled in as absence of interests. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Public information on conflicts of interest, sponsorship, program provision, data access, analysis and publication roles. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Public information on conflicts of interest, sponsorship, program provision, data access, analysis and publication roles. - Required materials and conditions: Public information on conflicts of interest, sponsorship, program provision, data access, analysis and publication roles. - Materials to obtain first: Public information on conflicts of interest, sponsorship, program provision, data access, analysis and publication roles. - Further research: Independence should be distinguished using materials showing the actual parties, involvement and data sharing. - Conditions for verification: What interests and research roles did authors, instructors and institutions have? Public information on conflicts of interest, sponsorship, program provision, data access, analysis and publication roles. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What interests and research roles did authors, instructors and institutions have? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N22 · How much harm data were actually collected and reported for yoga and splints? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original safety label is Caution; the parent safety narrative is retained as a historical stored summary. Direct study-specific tables of adverse-event counts, definitions, collection, severity, group denominators and follow-up are unavailable here. No new advice on stopping, treatment or self-care is given to individuals. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Original safety-collection methods, events, group denominators, exposure, duration and discontinuation data. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original safety-collection methods, events, group denominators, exposure, duration and discontinuation data. - Required materials and conditions: Original safety-collection methods, events, group denominators, exposure, duration and discontinuation data. - Materials to obtain first: Original safety-collection methods, events, group denominators, exposure, duration and discontinuation data. - Further research: Harms from exercise and control exposures require direct event-specific verification and comparative data. - Conditions for verification: How much harm data were actually collected and reported for yoga and splints? Original safety-collection methods, events, group denominators, exposure, duration and discontinuation data. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How much harm data were actually collected and reported for yoga and splints? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not convert missing safety figures into zero adverse events or absence of harm. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N23 · What are the timing, changes, missing data and alternative explanations for harms? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The temporal relationships of actual movements, splint use, baseline severity, concurrent treatments and discontinuation with symptoms or harms remain unverified. The 9 withdrawals or exclusions are not assumed to be harms, and a single cause is not established. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Baseline risk, actual exposure, changes, event timing, verification, missing data and reasons for discontinuation. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Baseline risk, actual exposure, changes, event timing, verification, missing data and reasons for discontinuation. - Required materials and conditions: Baseline risk, actual exposure, changes, event timing, verification, missing data and reasons for discontinuation. - Materials to obtain first: Baseline risk, actual exposure, changes, event timing, verification, missing data and reasons for discontinuation. - Further research: Interpretation of harms should be supplemented by data on actual exposure, verification, comparisons and alternative explanations. - Conditions for verification: What are the timing, changes, missing data and alternative explanations for harms? Baseline risk, actual exposure, changes, event timing, verification, missing data and reasons for discontinuation. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the timing, changes, missing data and alternative explanations for harms? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N24 · What are the gaps in long-term harms, vulnerable populations and rare harms? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: A summary of a small selected population over eight weeks cannot establish long-term or rare harms, or safety at other severity levels or with comorbidities. The original Caution label and unverified direct safety data are retained. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Long-term follow-up and exposure, denominator and comparative data for vulnerable populations and rare events. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Long-term follow-up and exposure, denominator and comparative data for vulnerable populations and rare events. - Required materials and conditions: Long-term follow-up and exposure, denominator and comparative data for vulnerable populations and rare events. - Materials to obtain first: Long-term follow-up and exposure, denominator and comparative data for vulnerable populations and rare events. - Further research: Long-term and rare harms require separate direct data with adequate follow-up and collection. - Conditions for verification: What are the gaps in long-term harms, vulnerable populations and rare harms? Long-term follow-up and exposure, denominator and comparative data for vulnerable populations and rare events. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the gaps in long-term harms, vulnerable populations and rare harms? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N25 · Can harm and symptom outcomes from the same trial be counted as independent replication? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: Grip, pain, signs, tests, the parent safety narrative and the two tables from one trial share the same report and population. Multiple outcomes do not create independent replications of effects or harms. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Relationships between reports, trials, populations, outcomes and follow-up, and the identity of new materials. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Relationships between reports, trials, populations, outcomes and follow-up, and the identity of new materials. - Required materials and conditions: Relationships between reports, trials, populations, outcomes and follow-up, and the identity of new materials. - Materials to obtain first: Relationships between reports, trials, populations, outcomes and follow-up, and the identity of new materials. - Further research: First distinguish whether new materials concern the same population or an independent one, then link them. - Conditions for verification: Can harm and symptom outcomes from the same trial be counted as independent replication? Relationships between reports, trials, populations, outcomes and follow-up, and the identity of new materials. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Can harm and symptom outcomes from the same trial be counted as independent replication? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Retain the new-unit increment of 0 and final independent count of null. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N26 · What are the unit, measurement target and direction of the grip-strength result? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original grip-strength result is the yoga group's before-and-after value of 162→187 mmHg. The original unit is retained without conversion to kg or force units. Details of hand- or wrist-specific measurement, dominant side, bilateral measurement, repetitions, equipment and standardization remain unverified. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Grip-strength equipment, units, hand/person measurement, repetitions, standardization and denominators. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Grip-strength equipment, units, hand/person measurement, repetitions, standardization and denominators. - Required materials and conditions: Grip-strength equipment, units, hand/person measurement, repetitions, standardization and denominators. - Materials to obtain first: Grip-strength equipment, units, hand/person measurement, repetitions, standardization and denominators. - Further research: Original materials showing the direct grip-strength measurement conditions are needed. - Conditions for verification: What are the unit, measurement target and direction of the grip-strength result? Grip-strength equipment, units, hand/person measurement, repetitions, standardization and denominators. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the unit, measurement target and direction of the grip-strength result? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not convert mmHg to new units or count left and right measurements as new participants. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N27 · What kind of values are the original numbers 162 and 187? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original account of the yoga group's grip strength increasing from 162 to 187 mmHg is retained. Variance, denominators, missing data at each time point, splint-group values, between-group estimates, CI and P are absent from the current summary. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original group-specific baseline, eight-week, change, variance, denominator, comparison and interval data. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original group-specific baseline, eight-week, change, variance, denominator, comparison and interval data. - Required materials and conditions: Original group-specific baseline, eight-week, change, variance, denominator, comparison and interval data. - Materials to obtain first: Original group-specific baseline, eight-week, change, variance, denominator, comparison and interval data. - Further research: Materials directly presenting original group results and the effect of interest are needed. - Conditions for verification: What kind of values are the original numbers 162 and 187? Original group-specific baseline, eight-week, change, variance, denominator, comparison and interval data. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What kind of values are the original numbers 162 and 187? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N28 · Is within-group grip-strength change the same as a between-group effect versus splints? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The parent assessment and subclaim describe a positive grip-strength result, but the available values, 162→187, are before-and-after values for the yoga group. They are not presented as a new between-group difference, adjusted effect or different estimate. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Original splint- and yoga-group analyses and definitions of between-/within-group effects, adjustment and denominators. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original splint- and yoga-group analyses and definitions of between-/within-group effects, adjustment and denominators. - Required materials and conditions: Original splint- and yoga-group analyses and definitions of between-/within-group effects, adjustment and denominators. - Materials to obtain first: Original splint- and yoga-group analyses and definitions of between-/within-group effects, adjustment and denominators. - Further research: Comparative intervention effects should be answered using actual control values and between-group analysis materials. - Conditions for verification: Is within-group grip-strength change the same as a between-group effect versus splints? Original splint- and yoga-group analyses and definitions of between-/within-group effects, adjustment and denominators. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Is within-group grip-strength change the same as a between-group effect versus splints? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not calculate new increases, ratios, CI or P values. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N29 · Are important grip-strength changes, individual responses and daily function established? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original summary has no direct values for clinically important grip-strength thresholds, responders, distributions, daily function or long-term persistence. Higher test values are not extended to functional recovery, disease treatment or nerve recovery in every patient. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Direct information on important change, responders, patient function, distributions and long-term follow-up. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Direct information on important change, responders, patient function, distributions and long-term follow-up. - Required materials and conditions: Direct information on important change, responders, patient function, distributions and long-term follow-up. - Materials to obtain first: Direct information on important change, responders, patient function, distributions and long-term follow-up. - Further research: Actual patient function and persistence require data for the relevant outcome, duration and comparison. - Conditions for verification: Are important grip-strength changes, individual responses and daily function established? Direct information on important change, responders, patient function, distributions and long-term follow-up. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Are important grip-strength changes, individual responses and daily function established? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N30 · What are the details of grip measurement, blinding, effort and wrist status? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original account that one physician, unaware of allocation, performed assessments is retained. External details of grip equipment, posture, effort, repetitions, learning, measurers, pain during measurement and standardization have not been read. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Original records of grip measurement, repetitions, assessors, standardization, blinding and status. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original records of grip measurement, repetitions, assessors, standardization, blinding and status. - Required materials and conditions: Original records of grip measurement, repetitions, assessors, standardization, blinding and status. - Materials to obtain first: Original records of grip measurement, repetitions, assessors, standardization, blinding and status. - Further research: Direct materials addressing measurement consistency and the effect of interest are needed. - Conditions for verification: What are the details of grip measurement, blinding, effort and wrist status? Original records of grip measurement, repetitions, assessors, standardization, blinding and status. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What are the details of grip measurement, blinding, effort and wrist status? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N31 · Are pain, Phalen findings and other null outcomes substituted for grip strength? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: Pain 5.0→2.9 and improvement in some Phalen-sign findings are other outcomes from the same trial. The original null-result account for sleep, Tinel and nerve-conduction tests is retained. Positive grip findings are not extended to these tests, every symptom or nerve recovery. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Direct tables for each outcome's definition, time point, denominator, between-group estimate and hierarchy. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Direct tables for each outcome's definition, time point, denominator, between-group estimate and hierarchy. - Required materials and conditions: Direct tables for each outcome's definition, time point, denominator, between-group estimate and hierarchy. - Materials to obtain first: Direct tables for each outcome's definition, time point, denominator, between-group estimate and hierarchy. - Further research: Other outcomes should each be answered using their own direct data. - Conditions for verification: Are pain, Phalen findings and other null outcomes substituted for grip strength? Direct tables for each outcome's definition, time point, denominator, between-group estimate and hierarchy. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Are pain, Phalen findings and other null outcomes substituted for grip strength? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N32 · What historical scope underlies the lack of confirmatory replication and the 28-year statement? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The original explanation states that there was no confirmatory replication after the 1998 trial; synth states that independent replication was not identified 28 years later. This is retained as history at the original evidence cut-off. No new search or verification of independence was performed in this work. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. New bibliographic, population, design, intervention and direct grip-strength result information for the same question. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; New bibliographic, population, design, intervention and direct grip-strength result information for the same question. - Required materials and conditions: New bibliographic, population, design, intervention and direct grip-strength result information for the same question. - Materials to obtain first: New bibliographic, population, design, intervention and direct grip-strength result information for the same question. - Further research: When independent results are added, distinguish shared original reports or populations from actual independence. - Conditions for verification: What historical scope underlies the lack of confirmatory replication and the 28-year statement? New bibliographic, population, design, intervention and direct grip-strength result information for the same question. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What historical scope underlies the lack of confirmatory replication and the 28-year statement? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not convert unverified replication into absence of all subsequent research or certification of new independent counts. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N33 · Can the findings be extended to general yoga, long-term treatment or other populations? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The current scope is an eight-week preliminary comparison of a specific supervised upper-body program with splints. Direct grip-strength efficacy for general yoga, other postures, diagnoses, severity levels and long-term treatment remains unverified. - Why unverified: Required direct details remain unverified within the current summary and unread external materials. Direct outcome data showing differences in programs, populations, controls and durations. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Direct outcome data showing differences in programs, populations, controls and durations. - Required materials and conditions: Direct outcome data showing differences in programs, populations, controls and durations. - Materials to obtain first: Direct outcome data showing differences in programs, populations, controls and durations. - Further research: Results under other conditions should be distinguished using the relevant question and actual exposure and comparison data. - Conditions for verification: Can the findings be extended to general yoga, long-term treatment or other populations? Direct outcome data showing differences in programs, populations, controls and durations. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Can the findings be extended to general yoga, long-term treatment or other populations? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Do not recommend exercise, products, self-care or treatment substitution. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N34 · How are the original direction of the grip result and its uncertainty retained together? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: The subclaim's grade B and note 'Positive in one small trial.' are retained. The parent's C50 history is also retained: eight weeks, completer analysis, one report, some positive outcomes and no replication. The subclaim grade is not replaced with the parent's grade, and the positive direction is not removed. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original subclaim and parent text, direct grip analyses and uncertainty information. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original subclaim and parent text, direct grip analyses and uncertainty information. - Required materials and conditions: Original subclaim and parent text, direct grip analyses and uncertainty information. - Materials to obtain first: Original subclaim and parent text, direct grip analyses and uncertainty information. - Further research: Data updates should distinguish the original assessment from observations and the current preparation status. - Conditions for verification: How are the original direction of the grip result and its uncertainty retained together? Original subclaim and parent text, direct grip analyses and uncertainty information. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: How are the original direction of the grip result and its uncertainty retained together? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: Distinguish the original summary from unread external materials; do not create calculations, effects, CI or new assessments beyond the original text. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ### N35 · What records are retained when grip-strength materials or corrections are updated? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: Summary read; external materials not read - Current findings: Original numbers, units, languages, dates, empty correction values and the sharing of one trial are retained. New materials should distinguish the full stored summary before a change, version and reason from changes to conditions and separate application events. - Why unverified: Some original-summary information was linked for preparation; clinical verification and review are not complete. Original locations, versions, questions, conditions, reasons for observation changes and additional direct materials. This scope remains for user review. - Reason for missing information: External abstracts, full papers, plans and original tables not read; Original locations, versions, questions, conditions, reasons for observation changes and additional direct materials. - Required materials and conditions: Original locations, versions, questions, conditions, reasons for observation changes and additional direct materials. - Materials to obtain first: Original locations, versions, questions, conditions, reasons for observation changes and additional direct materials. - Further research: If new original materials are separately added, link them to the relevant item while retaining the user's review scope. - Conditions for verification: What records are retained when grip-strength materials or corrections are updated? Original locations, versions, questions, conditions, reasons for observation changes and additional direct materials. Distinguish the original scope, extent of direct verification and what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: What records are retained when grip-strength materials or corrections are updated? This is needed to distinguish the relevant outcome, population and effect of interest from other scopes. - Application exceptions: This preparation does not create calculations, new effects/CI, grades or treatment guidance. - Remaining uncertainty: Unread external materials or missing information do not mean zero effect, zero events, no papers, failed access or a new assessment. - Referenced methods: These are study-family conditions linked to stored original text, not an application of an official clinical assessment method. - Related sources: R01 ## Evidence and sources ### R01 Garfinkel MS, et al. JAMA. 1998;280:1601-1603. PMID: 9820263. [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9820263/) Materials actually read: Summary read; external papers and plans not read Findings recorded in the summary: Grip strength 162→187 mmHg, pain 5.0→2.9 and some Phalen-sign improvement; sleep, Tinel sign and nerve-conduction tests had null results Record level: Reported values from the existing review summary. The original paper was not directly verified in this work. Independent replication: Grip strength and pain concern one Garfinkel 1998 report and population, PMID 9820263. They share 51 randomized, 42 analyzed, 9 withdrawn/excluded and other test results, and are not added as new independent replications. | Material | Public availability | Access status | Actually read | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---| | Stored existing review summary | Stored summary | Locally stored existing review summary read for preparation | Summary read | The existing review summary was read. This does not mean the original external paper was obtained or read. | | Paper abstract | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | Only the PMID bibliographic URL was linked; the abstract and result locations were not directly verified. | | Full paper | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | The URL is a bibliographic link; full-text acquisition and accessibility were not verified. | | Public registration and contemporaneous planning materials | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | Only the original status string, 'Not present because the study predates trial registration,' is retained. There is no valid registration ID in the record; no current search, registry access or verification of absence from every registry was performed. | | Study protocol | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | The original plans for the program, control, exposure, eligibility, allocation, assessment, outcome hierarchy and follow-up have not been obtained. | | Statistical analysis plan | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | Original plans for within-/between-group analyses, adjustment, completers, missing data, multiplicity and the effect of interest have not been obtained. | | Original results and safety tables | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | Original tables are needed to verify units, denominators, variance, scales, CI, harms and missing data for each group and outcome. | | Sponsorship and interest disclosures | External material unread; needed | Access not attempted; not obtained | Not read | The original scope of 'independent funding not established' is retained and not changed to no sponsorship. Details of funding, roles, data access and publication have not been obtained. | ## Review criteria and methods These are Chamgap's own application conditions, informed by the relevant sections of official methodological guidance. They do not constitute official assessment-tool certification or a new efficacy score. - M03 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-03) · §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13 · Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes, and distinguish variations in interventions. · Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work. - M04 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5.1 (2025), chapter updated 2025-03](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-04) · §4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42 · Distinguish studies from reports and link them; do not omit a study solely because results are unreported. · Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work. - M08 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-08) · §8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a · Define the outcome and effect of interest, then examine randomization, deviations, missing data, measurement and selective reporting. · Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work. - M15 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-15) · §15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3 · Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision. · Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work. - M19 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-19) · §19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4 · Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence rates. · Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work. ## What the statuses mean - Met: The original content has been reviewed as meeting the conditions. This status is not used in this preparation. - Partly verified: Some information in the stored summary was linked during preparation; clinical verification or review is not complete. - Unverified: Required direct values, definitions or materials have not been established within the current storage and reading scope. This does not mean zero effect, no papers or failed access. - Review incomplete: Awaiting user review, or actual review remains incomplete. - Not reported: Used only when original materials were actually read and the outcome was judged unreported. Not used for external materials unread in this work. - Inaccessible: Used only when an actual access attempt has a recorded failure. Not used for access that was not attempted in this work. - Insufficient evidence for the conditions: Indicates insufficient direct materials for the relevant scope or conditions; it is not a new grade. - Not applicable: Used when the reason it does not apply to the original question is stated. - Conflicting data: Retains the scope of conflicting statements in original materials; it is not an arbitrary reassessment. ## Change history 2026-10-09 · Public page/materials 1.0. The public page and materials were prepared from the existing 35 items. No new clinical search, change in verification status or scoring was performed.