ArticleJournal of physical therapy science2015
Comparison of trunk and hip muscle activity during different degrees of lumbar and hip extension.
Article in Journal of physical therapy science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gluteal muscle activation during rehabilitation exercises in female field hockey players.The South African journal of physiotherapy · 2021Article
- Evaluating gluteus maximus maximal voluntary isometric contractions for EMG normalization in male rugby players.Journal of physical therapy science · 2019Article
- EXAMINATION OF GLUTEUS MAXIMUS ELECTROMYOGRAPHIC EXCITATION ASSOCIATED WITH DYNAMIC HIP EXTENSION DURING BODY WEIGHT EXERCISE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] This study compared the activity of trunk and hip muscles during different degrees of lumbar and hip extension. [Subjects] The study enrolled 18 participants. [Methods] Two exercises (hip and lumbar extension) and two ranges (180° and <180°) were studied. [Results] Differences in degree of extension affected the percentage maximal voluntary isometric contraction of the lumbar erector spinae and biceps femoris muscles, with significantly higher average values at >180° than at 180° lumbar extension. No significant differences were found in gluteus maximus activity according to exercise type or range. [Conclusion] Hip extension may be more effective and safer for lumbar rehabilitation than lumbar extension.
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.