ArticleScientific reports2024
Design and validation of a wearable dynamometry system for knee extension-flexion torque measurement.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Design and Validation of a Hand Interossei Muscle Dynamometer (HIMDNA) for Finger Abduction and Adduction Strength Measurement.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Wearable sensor assessment of neuromuscular latency: revealing the strength-timing trade-off in female soccer.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Agreement-Based Validation of ISOMETRO for Upper-Limb Isometric Tension Measurements.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Wearable devices in neurological disorders: a narrative review of status quo and perspectives.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Estimation of elbow flexion torque from anthropometric and NMES MMG variables using random forest regression.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Estimation of lower limb torque: a novel hybrid method based on continuous wavelet transform and deep learning approach.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Muscle strength assessments are vital in rehabilitation, orthopedics, and sports medicine. However, current methods used in clinical settings, such as manual muscle testing and hand-held dynamometers, often lack reliability, and isokinetic dynamometers (IKD), while reliable, are not easily portable. The aim of this study was to design and validate a wearable dynamometry system with high accessibility, accuracy, and reliability, and to validate the device. Therefore, we designed a wearable dynamometry system (WDS) equipped with knee joint torque sensors. To validate this WDS, we measured knee extension and flexion strength in 39 healthy adults using both the IKD and WDS. Comparing maximal isometric torque measurements, WDS and IKD showed strong correlation and good reliability for extension (Pearson's r: 0.900; intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]: 0.893; standard error of measurement [SEM]: 9.85%; minimal detectable change [MDC]: 27.31%) and flexion (Pearson's r: 0.870; ICC: 0.857; SEM: 11.93%; MDC: 33.07%). WDS demonstrated excellent inter-rater (Pearson's r: 0.990; ICC: 0.993; SEM: 4.05%) and test-retest (Pearson's r: 0.970; ICC: 0.984; SEM: 6.15%) reliability during extension/flexion. User feedback from 35 participants, including healthcare professionals, underscores WDS's positive user experience and clinical potential. The proposed WDS is a suitable alternative to IKD, providing high accuracy, reliability, and potentially greater accessibility.
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.