SynthesisAnnals of medicine2025
Handgrip strength measurement protocols in individuals with Down syndrome: a systematic review and meta-regression.
Synthesis in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHandgrip strength (HGS) serves as a robust predictor of overall strength across various populations, including individuals with Down Syndrome (DS).
objectiveTo analyze the HGS measurement protocols used in studies involving individuals with DS.
methodsPrimary sources were sourced from six databases: PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Embase, ERIC, and Web of Science, spanning from inception to 23rd December 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on individuals with DS, compared with control groups, and examined HGS measurement protocols and outcomes. Meta-regression was utilized to assess bias associated with HGS values concerning different measurement protocols.
resultsOut of 29 studies involving 1816 participants, most controlled for body position (65%), arm position (82%), elbow position (82%), wrist position (62%), handgrip duration (55%), hand adjustment to dynamometer (62%), verbal encouragement (75%), and familiarization (44.8%). The number of reported variables in the HGS protocol was significantly associated with an increase in HGS, with a mean estimate of 20.59 units (SE = 2.59,
conclusionOverall, protocols for assessing HGS in DS studies are comprehensive yet heterogeneous. Higher HGS values correlated with adherence to standard protocols.
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.