ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Establishing normative pinch and grip strengths across adult age groups in Singapore.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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.
- Reference Values for Maximal Isometric Handgrip and Pinch Strength in Healthy Italian Adults Without Occupational Biomechanical Overload.La Medicina del lavoro · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPinch and grip strengths are vital indicators of upper limb function, musculoskeletal health, and general health. While most research has focused on older individuals, it is crucial to build normative data for younger populations. This cross-sectional study was conducted to determine the normative values for lateral pinch strength (LPS) and hand grip strength (HGS) in healthy adult Singaporeans.
methodsThe study recruited 500 healthy individuals without any serious general illnesses and upper limb pain, aged 21-80 years. LPS and HGS were measured using a standardized JAMAR hand dynamometer. Age, gender, hand dominance, and participant demographics were recorded. Normative values were then established for different age groups and hand dominance. A machine learning approach was employed to determine the most relevant variables for dominant LPS and HGS in our data, respectively.
resultsOur data showed that HGS and LPS peaked between 40-44 years of age in women. In men, average HGS peaked between 35-39 years and LPS peaked between 50-54 years. Compared to the non-dominant side, dominant HGS was 6.86% and 6.23% higher in women and men, respectively. The difference between dominant and non-dominant LPS in men and women was 6.96% and 9.18%, respectively. Age was strongly associated with hand strength for older participants, but not for younger ones. Height, weight, and age were important for predicting dominant HGS and LPS, and gait speed for HGS only.
conclusionsOur data align with past results, but the normative values are comparatively lower than the consolidated Western norms. Compared to the non-dominant hand, the strength of the dominant hand is significantly higher. No statistical difference between the right- and left-handed participants in terms of dominant HGS and dominant LPS. The results can be valuable for researchers and healthcare providers working with young and older adults.
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.