ArticleJournal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions2022
Peak power and body mass as predictors of tibial bone strength in healthy male and female adults.
Article in Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Countermovement jump peak force discriminates low hip bone mineral density in postmenopausal women.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to examine whether a non-invasive, muscular fitness field test was a better predictor of bone strength compared to body mass in healthy adults.
methodsHierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to determine the amount of variance that peak power explained for tibial bone strength compared to body mass. Peak power was estimated from maximal vertical jump height using the Sayer's equation. Peripheral quantitative computed tomography scans were used to assess bone strength measures.
resultsPeak power (β=0.541, p<0.001) contributed more to the unique variance in bone strength index for compression (trabecular bone) compared to body mass (β=-0.102, p=0.332). For polar strength strain index (cortical bone), the beta coefficient for body mass remained significant (β=0.257, p<0.006), however peak power's contribution was similar (β=0.213, p=0.051).
conclusionCompared to body mass, peak power was a better predictor for trabecular bone strength but similar to body mass for cortical bone strength. These data provide additional support for the development of a vertical jump test as an objective, valid and reliable measure to monitor bone strength among youth and adult populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35642695PMC9186462W4282924278What 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.