Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36645122›Full record

SynthesisSports health2023

A Systematic Review of Isokinetic Muscle Strength in a Healthy Population With Special Reference to Age and Gender.

Ingara Fernanda S R Schindler, Sarah S Pontes, Mariana B M Bertoni, Grimaldo F Junior, Balbino R N Júnior, Fábio L A de Jesus, Mansueto G Neto

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06733116 (Standardizing Reporting Practices for Isokinetic Testing), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06733116 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Standardizing Reporting Practices for Isokinetic Testing: a Delphi Study

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, CaenRan2025 to 2025Enrolled30ConditionsDeveloping a Consensus Framework to Standardize Isokinetic Testing Data ReportingArmsDelphi method survey
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Factors, mechanisms and improvement methods of muscle strength loss.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ingara Fernanda S R SchindlerPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Sarah S PontesPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Mariana B M BertoniPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Grimaldo F JuniorPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Balbino R N JúniorPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Fábio L A de JesusPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Mansueto G NetoPhysiotherapy Research Group, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0717-9694

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextDespite increasing use of reference values in isokinetic measurements and increasing importance, there is no systematic review of the reference values for lower and upper limb isokinetic muscle strength.

objectiveA systematic review to analyze studies on the reference values and protocols for the measurement for upper and lower limb isokinetic muscle strength in an untrained and noninjured healthy population. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Scopus, Scielo, and CINAHL (from the earliest date available to June 2020). STUDY SELECTION: Studies that measured a set of reference values for isokinetic muscle strength. STUDY

designSystematic review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers selected studies independently. Data related to participants characteristics, outcomes of interest, isokinetic parameters, reference values for isokinetic muscle strength, and quality of evidence assessment were systematically reviewed independently by 2 authors.

resultsA total of 31 studies met the study criteria. The included studies were used to synthesize the isokinetic muscle strength data according to age-group and sex. We extracted 1845 normative data related to isokinetic strength. Of these, 1181 items referred to lower limbs and 664 items to upper limbs.

conclusionIn general, agonist muscle groups are stronger than antagonist muscles, and the men tend to obtain higher strength values than women. The angular velocity varied from 10 to 300 deg/s. The reference values identified can be useful for professionals to obtain during the isokinetic evaluation of the diagnostic parameters of muscle deficiency.

Indexed as

Muscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthExercise TherapyFemaleHealth StatusHumansLower ExtremityMaledynamometryhealthy populationisokineticmuscle strengthreference values

Identifiers

PMID36645122
PMCPMC10170235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.