ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
The Reliability and Validity of an Isometric Knee Strength Measurement Device in Older Adult Individuals.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity and Feasibility of the Constant-Load Cycle Endurance Test in Lung Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy.Thoracic cancer · 2026Article
- Smartphone-Derived Movement Analysis for Musculoskeletal Assessment: Smartphone-Estimated Relative Vertical Power During the Sit-to-Stand Test as an Accessible Predictor of Knee Extensor Strength in Older Adults.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Inter-Session Reliability of an Isometric Muscle Strength Protocol in Older Adults.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Leg Strength Analyzer (IB-LS) in assessing isometric knee flexion and extension strength in elderly adults, compare its performance with that of the CSMI dynamometer, and examine its agreement with isokinetic knee strength measurements. A total of 21 elderly participants (mean age: 65.10 ± 4.56 years) were recruited. Participants underwent knee flexion and extension strength assessments using both the IB-LS and CSMI devices, with isokinetic strength at 60°/s measured in a follow-up session at least one day later. The IB-LS demonstrated high test-retest reliability in elderly adults (ICC = 0.856-0.987). The validity analysis comparing IB-LS isometric peak torque with CSMI isometric peak torque showed moderate to high validity (ICC = 0.826-0.946). Furthermore, IB-LS isometric peak torque and CSMI isokinetic 60°/s peak torque demonstrated high agreement (ICC = 0.775-0.881), demonstrating its strong association with isokinetic strength assessments. Bland-Altman analysis revealed that mean differences between IB-LS and CSMI isometric peak torque values ranged from 13.2 to 93.5 Nm, with limits of agreement (LoA) spanning from -55.8 to 192.5 Nm. When comparing IB-LS isometric peak torque with CSMI isokinetic 60°/s peak torque, mean differences ranged from 31.0 to 56.0 Nm, with LoA from -28.5 to 138.9 Nm. The IB-LS is a reliable and valid tool for evaluating isometric knee strength in elderly adults. Its strong agreement with the CSMI dynamometer and close correlation with isokinetic strength measurements indicate that IB-LS can be a feasible alternative for assessing knee strength in clinical and research settings focused on elderly populations.
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.