## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Study** & **Influence Factors** & **Design Sample Size** & \(p\)**-Value** & **Effect Estimate** & **Related with CTS** \\ \hline  & & & & Total grip strength (\%) & \\  & & & Total grip strength: & \(\pm\)50 years: 138 (44) & \\  & & & Total grip strength: & 41-65 years: 106 (53) & \\ [PERSON] et al. [9] & Age & 386 patients with CTS & \(p=0.05\) & \(>\)65 years: 87 (27) & Yes \\  & & & Key pinch strength: & Key pinch strength: & \\  & & & \(p=0.18\) & \(\pm\)50 years: 122 (43) & \\  & & & & 41-65 years: 102 (36) & \\  & & & & \(>\)65 years: 93 (22) & \\ \hline  & & & Symptom severity score & \\  & & & & \(\leq\)50 years improvement: 1.60 & \\ [PERSON] et al. [10] & Age & Prospective study & & \(>\)60 years improvement: 0.90 & Yes \\  & & & tunnel decompression & Functional status score & \\  & & & & \(\leq\)50 years improvement: 0.86 & \\  & & & & \(>\)60 years improvement: 0.49 & \\ \hline  & & & & \(<\)statistic (\%5\(\times\)C) & \\  & & & & Cross-sectional area & \\  & & & & \(<\)65 years: 0.94 (0.92\(-\)0.97) & \\ [PERSON] et al. [13] & Age & 433 patients & Age \(\geq\)65 years (moderate and severe CTS): \(p<\) 0.01 & \(\pm\)65 years: 0.85 (0.78\(-\)0.92) & Yes \\  & & & & \(<\)65 years: 0.96 (0.93\(-\)0.99) & \\  & & & & \(\geq\)65 years: 0.86 (0.79\(-\)0.94) & \\ \hline [PERSON] and [PERSON] [11] & Age (patient \(>\)65 year at risk) & 101 patients & \(p=0.001\) & OR (95\% CI): 17.85 & \\  & & & & (3.47\(-\)91.87) & Yes \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [12] & Ages \(>\) 55 &
\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} & & Prevalence of CTS: 22.2\% & Yes \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Summary of the results obtained from the research reviewed. BMI: Body mass index, PAF: Fraction attributable to the work-related population, SSS: Symptom severity scale. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**Study** & **Influence Factors** & **Design Sample Size** & \(p\)**-Value** & **Effect Estimate** & **Related with CTS** \\ \hline  & & & & Time’s sign & \\  & & & & Prior to surgery: 68\% positive & \\  & & & & After surgery: 32\% positive & \\  & & & & & [PERSON]’s test & \\  & & & & Thalen’s isst & \(p=0.001\) & Prior to surgery: 89\% positive & \\  & & & [PERSON]’s test & \(p<0.001\) & After surgery: 11\% positive & \\ [PERSON] et al. [14] & Age & Prospective assessment & Semmes-Wointen test: & Semmes-Wointen test & Yes \\  & & & \(p<0.001\) & Prior to surgery: & \\  & & & Symptom status scores: & 2.4 \(\pm\) 0.05 points & \\  & & & \(p<0.001\) & After surgery: 1.97 \(\pm\) 0.04 points & \\  & & & & Symptom status scores: Average) & \\  & & & & Prior to surgery: 2.8 \(\pm\) 0.04 & \\  & & & & After surgery: 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.04 & \\ \hline de [PERSON] et al. [15] & Age (continuous) & \begin{tabular}{c} 205 participants \\ 285 hands with \\ CTS diagnosed \\ \end{tabular} & & & & \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [16] & BMI & \begin{tabular}{c} 27 patients with CTS \\ symptoms 27 controls \\ \end{tabular} & & & & \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [17] & BMI & \begin{tabular}{c} 131 patients with \\ CTS symptoms \\ 131 controls \\ \end{tabular} & \(p<0.001\) & \begin{tabular}{c} OR (95\% CI): 1.323, correlation \\ coefficient r = 0.280 \\ \end{tabular} & \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [18] & BMI & \begin{tabular}{c} 100 patients with CTS \\ 100 healthy volunteers \\ \end{tabular} & \(p<0.001\) & \begin{tabular}{c} Correlation coefficient \\ CTS and BMI \\ \(\tau=0.285\) \\ \end{tabular} & Yes \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [19] & BMI & \begin{tabular}{c} 126 patients with \\ BMI \(\geq\) 30 \\ \end{tabular} & & & \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [20] & BMI & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 50 patients with uhar \\ neuropathy at the \\ elbow diagnosis \\ 50 patients with CTS \\ \end{tabular} & \(p=0.007\) &
\begin{tabular}{c} Positive correlation between \\ BMI and uhar nerve \\ conduction velocity: \(\hat{\tau}^{2}=0.22\) \\ \end{tabular} & Yes \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: _Cont._