ArticleSAGE open medicine2017
Validity and test-retest reliability of a novel simple back extensor muscle strength test.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Criterion-Related Validity of a Simple Muscle Strength Test to Assess Whole Body Muscle Strength in Chinese Children Aged 10 to 12 Years.BioMed research international · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Reliability of the Seated Unilateral Cable Row and Strength Differences Between Dominant and Non-Dominant Sides in Young Athletes.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Reliability of a Trunk Flexion and Extensor Muscle Strength Test with Hand-Held and Isokinetic Dynamometers in Female Athletes.Journal of human kinetics · 2024Article
- Reliability of a Custom Device Used to Measure Isometric Knee Flexor and Extensor Strength in Standing Position.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Trunk muscle dysfunction in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 and its contribution to chronic low back pain.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Evidence- and data-driven classification of low back pain via artificial intelligence: Protocol of the PREDICT-LBP study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Reliability of Repeated Nordic Hamstring Strength in Rugby Players Using a Load Cell Device.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Natural aging course of lumbar extensor muscle mass and strength in community-dwelling older women: a 1-year prospective observational study.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2022Observational
- Article
- Paraspinal strength and electromyographic fatigue in patients with sub-acute back pain and controls: Reliability, clinical applicability and between-group differences.World journal of orthopedics · 2021Article
- Novel lateral whole-body dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of lumbar paraspinal muscle mass: results from the SarcoSpine study.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2021Observational
- Isokinetic trunk muscle performance in adolescents with different body mass indices.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2021Article
- Reliability of an adapted core strength endurance test battery in individuals with axial spondylarthritis.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Article
- Assessment of isokinetic trunk muscle strength and its association with health-related quality of life in patients with degenerative spinal deformity.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Reliability and Validity of a New Eccentric Hamstring Strength Measurement Device.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2020Article
- ISOKINETIC TRUNK STRENGTH, VALIDITY, RELIABILITY, NORMATIVE DATA AND RELATION TO PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE AND LOW BACK PAIN: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2020Article
- Reliability and validity of three isometric back extensor strength assessments with different test postures.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop and determine convergent validity and reliability of a simple and inexpensive clinical test to quantify back extensor muscle strength.
methodsTwo testing sessions were conducted, 7 days apart. Each session involved three trials of standing maximal isometric back extensor muscle strength using both the novel test and isokinetic dynamometry. Lumbar spine bone mineral density was examined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Validation was examined with Pearson correlations (
resultsA total of 52 healthy adults (26 men, 26 women) aged 46.4 ± 20.4 years were recruited from the community. A strong positive relationship was observed between peak back extensor strength from hand-held and isokinetic dynamometry (
conclusionOur novel hand-held dynamometer method to determine back extensor muscle strength is quick, relatively inexpensive, and reliable; demonstrates initial convergent validity in a healthy population; and is associated with bone mass at a clinically important site.
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.