{
  "abstract": "Objective\n\nThis study evaluated concordance between referral impressions, structured pre-test assessment, and electrodiagnostic findings (EDX), compared the concordance of an electrodiagnostic consultant's (EC) pre-test assessment and the referring clinician's impression with the final EDX diagnosis.Methods\n\nA single-center, prospective observational study enrolled 104 participants over 9 months; 101 completed testing. The EC recorded a diagnostic impression before nerve conduction studies and needle electromyography (EMG). Final diagnoses were categorized using an ICD-10 root-based schema. Referral, pre-test, and final diagnoses were compared using exact agreement between the first-listed primary ICD-10 diagnosis codes.Results\n\nAmong 101 patients (mean age 59 years; 59.4% female), referral-final concordance was 34.7% (35/101), compared with 71.3% (72/101) for EC pre-test-final concordance (matched OR, 6.29; 95% CI, 2.81-16.54; p < 0.001). EDX produced a clinically meaningful diagnostic change in 67 patients (66.3%) and modified management in 53 (52.5%); subsequent implementation was not assessed. The EC pre-test diagnosis differed from the final EDX diagnosis in 29 cases (28.7%).Conclusions\n\nEDX frequently identified diagnoses that differed from referral impressions and sometimes differed from the consultant's pre-test assessment. The higher pre-test-final concordance reflects within-clinician agreement after a focused history and examination; it does not establish that the electrodiagnostic consultant is more diagnostically accurate than referring clinicians.Significance\n\nThis single-center exploratory study supports the clinical value of a focused pre-test assessment and of EDX as a diagnostic consultation. Larger, multicenter studies using independent assessment are needed.",
  "abstract_shown": true,
  "affiliations": [
    "Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Auburn Hills, MI, USA."
  ],
  "article_type": "research article",
  "arxiv": null,
  "author_total": 2,
  "authors": [
    {
      "affs": [
        0
      ],
      "name": "Lauren L Walkon"
    },
    {
      "affs": [
        0
      ],
      "name": "Daniel Menkes"
    }
  ],
  "bibtex": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/1sb4tfcd5phsh.bib",
  "cited_by": 0,
  "doi": "10.1016/j.cnp.2026.09.008",
  "fulltext_url": "https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC13693330",
  "id": "1sb4tfcd5phsh",
  "issns": [
    "2467-981X"
  ],
  "landing_url": "https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42921148",
  "language": "eng",
  "licence": "CC-BY",
  "licence_label": "CC BY",
  "licence_source": "article",
  "licence_url": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "metadata_licence": null,
  "native_subjects": [
    [
      "openalex",
      "2741|Peripheral Nerve Disorders"
    ]
  ],
  "openalex": "W7221560111",
  "pdf_url": "https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC13693330?pdf=render",
  "pmcid": "PMC13693330",
  "pmid": "42921148",
  "published": "2026-10-12",
  "publisher": null,
  "ris": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/1sb4tfcd5phsh.ris",
  "sources": [
    {
      "first_seen": "2026-10-30T12:20:33Z",
      "native_id": "MED:42921148",
      "source": "europepmc",
      "url": "https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42921148"
    }
  ],
  "subjects": [
    {
      "field": "medicine",
      "origin": "openalex:2741|Peripheral Nerve Disorders",
      "subfield": "imaging"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Diagnostic discordance between referral impressions, clinical assessment, and final electrodiagnostic findings.",
  "title_text": "Diagnostic discordance between referral impressions, clinical assessment, and final electrodiagnostic findings.",
  "type": "peer-reviewed",
  "updated_at": "2026-10-30T12:20:33Z",
  "url": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/1sb4tfcd5phsh",
  "venue": "Clinical neurophysiology practice",
  "versions": []
}