ArticleJournal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology2013
Relationships among the muscle strength properties as assessed through various tests and variables.
Article in Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Measures of Torque Development are Related to Peak Torque at Six Months Following ACL Reconstruction.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2025Article
- Is Test Standardization Important when Arm and Leg Muscle Mechanical Properties are Assessed through the Force-Velocity Relationship?Journal of human kinetics · 2019Article
- Muscle Force-Velocity Relationships Observed in Four Different Functional Tests.Journal of human kinetics · 2017Article
- Asymmetries in explosive strength following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.The Knee · 2014Article
- Reduced Appendicular Lean Body Mass, Muscle Strength, and Size of Type II Muscle Fibers in Patients with Spondyloarthritis versus Healthy Controls: A Cross-Sectional Study.TheScientificWorldJournalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We tested the hypotheses that the individual strength properties depend on the applied test and the variable extracted, rather than on the muscle group tested. Flexor and extensor muscles acting in the knee and elbow joint were tested in 58 participants. The standard strength test (SST; based on sustained maximum contraction) and alternating consecutive maximum contractions (ACMCs; alternating contractions of antagonistic muscles) performed under static conditions were separately applied to provide the maximum force (F) and the rate of force development (RFD) of each tested muscle. The principal component analysis applied on all 16 variables revealed three factors that explained 85.5% of the total variance. Contrary to our hypotheses, the individual factors were loaded with the variables recorded from individual muscles, rather than with either the particular variables or tests. The present findings suggest that recording both F and RFD in routine strength testing procedures could be redundant since they may assess the same strength property of the tested muscle. In addition, ACMC may be a feasible alternative to SST since it could assess the same strength properties from two antagonist muscles through a single trial, while being based on relatively low and transient forces.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.