ArticleBrazilian journal of physical therapy
Concurrent validity of handheld dynamometer measurements for scapular protraction strength.
Article in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concurrent validity and agreement of the HerniaCare Lab device for abdominal wall strength assessment.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Is Handgrip Strength a Useful Measure to Evaluate Lower Limb Strength and Functional Performance in Older Women?Clinical interventions in aging · 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHandheld dynamometers (HHD) provide quick and low-cost assessments of muscle strength and their use has been increasing in clinical practice. There is no available data related to the validity of HHD for this measurement.
objectiveTo verify the concurrent validity of scapular protraction measurements using an HHD.
methodsIndividuals with traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability were allocated in Instability Group (n=20), healthy swimmers were allocated in Athletes Group (n=19) and healthy subjects were allocated in Sedentary Group (n=21). Concurrent validity was verified by the Pearson correlation test between HHD and isokinetic measurements. The agreement between instruments was verified by Bland-Altman plots, for each of the two HHD positions.
resultsA moderate correlation was observed between seated (r=0.59) and lying supine HHD (r=0.54) and isokinetic dynamometer measurements for the all groups. Separated group analysis exhibited a strong correlation between seated HHD and isokinetic dynamometer measurements in the Instability Group (r=0.80), Sedentary Group (r=0.79) and Athletes Group (r=0.76). The Bland-Altman plot showed greater agreement in the seated position than the lying supine position when comparing measurements with the HHD and isokinetic in both the general sample and separated groups.
conclusionThe HHD may be considered a valid tool for assessing scapular protraction muscle strength among healthy athletes, non-athletes and subjects with shoulder instability. We recommend to assess subjects in the seated position and to be aware that the HHD tends to overestimate the peak force, compared with the gold-standard isokinetic dynamometer.
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.