ArticlePloS one2025
Subjective and objective indices in determining stretching effect.
Article in PloS one, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stretching is widely used in clinical settings to maintain and enhance physical functions. Despite numerous studies investigating its effects, subjective evaluations by therapists remain common, lacking objective assessment criteria. This study aims to bridge this gap by correlating objective measures with subjective evaluations by therapists and patients. The hypotheses are: (1) significant correlation between objective measures and subjective assessments, (2) consistency in therapist judgments, and (3) identification of objective criteria. This research aims to formalize clinical knowledge and enhance stretching interventions' applicability. Sixteen physiotherapists participated, with varying clinical experience. Straight leg raising stretching was performed on a simulated patient. Objective measures included joint angle, electromyography, and posterior thigh stiffness. Subjective evaluations were made by therapists and simulated patient using numerical rating scales. Therapists' ratings correlated positively with straight leg raising angle change and stretching duration. Simulated patient's ratings correlated positively with an integral electromyographic values of semitendinosus muscle activity but negatively with joint angle change. Regression analysis did not yield significant predictive models. Subjective evaluations may deviate from objective outcomes, highlighting the need for a better understanding of their relationship. Physiotherapists detected small joint angle improvements subjectively, but no objective predictor of this change was found. Patients' subjective evaluations did not align with objective outcomes. This suggests therapists' evaluations may be more accurate. Additional investigation into subjective evaluation criteria is warranted. Therapists should be cautious in relying solely on patient feedback, emphasizing the need for objective assessment in clinical practice.
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.