ArticleInternational journal of exercise science2021
Evaluating the Intra-Rater and Inter-Rater Reliability of Fixed Tension Scale Instrumentation for Determining Isometric Neck Strength.
Article in International journal of exercise science, 2021. 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.
- Evaluating a 14-week neck strengthening protocol for neuromuscular indicators associated with head and neck trauma.Sports medicine and health science · 2025Article
- Between-Session Reliability of Field-Based Assessments of Isometric Neck Strength.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of a fixed tension scale instrumentation, comparing the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability between seating and standing measurement techniques. Instrumentation developed from this study will be utilized to assess isometric neck strength in future studies comparing neck strengthening protocols.
methodsIsometric neck strength for eight movements (cervical/capital flexion, cervical/capital extension, left/right lateral flexion, left/right cervical rotation) as well as anthropometric measurements were evaluated for thirty-one participants through the use of a novel neck strength assessment protocol.
resultsThe fixed tension scale instrumentation and methods used in this study demonstrated good to excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC range from 0.78 to 0.97) as well as moderate to excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC range from 0.73 to 0.91) for both measurement techniques. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: This study will provide foundational knowledge for the reliable assessment of neck strength. Additionally, the findings will provide a cost-effective, portable, and reliable instrument for measuring isometric neck strength.
conclusionsSeated and standing measurement techniques demonstrated similar intra and inter-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability tended to be lower with motions (capital flexion and extension) that required the participants to face directly towards or away from the instrumentation. This could be due to participant positioning or unfamiliarity with those specific movements. The assessment protocol utilized in this study demonstrated comparable inter-rater reliability to another cost-effective method for evaluating isometric neck strength.
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.