ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Investigating the Effect of Elevation and Sex-Based Differences on Shoulder Proprioceptive Accuracy.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. 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.
- Maximum Shoulder Torque and Muscle Activation During Standing Arm Flexion: Reference Data for Biomechanical and Ergonomic Applications.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Evaluating shoulder proprioception provides functional data that supplement imaging for the diagnosis/rehabilitation of rotator cuff injuries. There is a need for a system capable of establishing normal ranges for proprioceptive accuracy in healthy shoulders during unrestricted 3-dimensional motion. Purpose: To conduct passive joint position sense (JPS) testing in men and women with no history of shoulder injury using a novel testing system, identifying differences in proprioceptive accuracy based on sex, shoulder elevation, and crossbody position. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: We recruited 20 (10 male and 10 female) healthy participants aged between 18 and 25 years for JPS testing. Participants used a single wrist-worn sensor, and our primary outcome was errors in position matching (first guiding a participant's dominant arm from a neutral starting position to a target position and then having participants independently return from the start position to the same target) across 12 targets comprised of all possible combinations of shoulder elevation angles (EAs) (30°, 60°, 90°, and 120°) and crossbody angles (CAs) (0°, 45°, and 90°). A linear mixed model was employed to evaluate sex- and position-based differences in JPS accuracy. Results: Position-matching accuracy increased in both males and females as target EAs increased from 30° to 120° ( Conclusion: Proprioceptive accuracy increased in both sexes at higher shoulder elevations. In the 90° CA plane, females demonstrated greater CA undershoot than males. Clinical Relevance: While magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound are effective tools for determining the size/age of rotator cuff tears, they do not provide functional prognostic insight for pain or mobility. Proprioceptive testing, as a functional metric based on free shoulder motion, may assist in clinically characterizing a patient's shoulder injury and rehabilitative success at multiple time points.
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.