ArticleMuscles (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Article in Muscles (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
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
Isometric strength is widely used to monitor training adaptations, assess neuromuscular fatigue, and play a critical role in the maintenance of muscle health. This study assessed repeatability (intra-session) and reliability (inter-session) of a force production machine in different exercises: Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull (IMTP), Knee Flexion (KF) at 30°, and Seated Calf Raise (SCR). Parameters measured included Peak Force (PF), RFD at 0-50, 0-100, 0-150, 0-200, 50-100, 100-150 and 150-200 ms. Thirty male individuals (IMTP = 30; KF = 11 and SCR = 30) participated (age: 20.6 ± 3.6 years, mass: 75.3 ± 7.5 kg, height: 1.80 ± 0.64 m). Repeatability and reliability were calculated for bilateral PF and RFD for IMTP and SCR, and unilateral for KF. PF demonstrated good to excellent repeatability in all exercises: IMTP (ICC = 0.93), KF (left: ICC = 0.98; right: ICC = 0.97), SCR (ICC = 0.84). RFD displayed poor to good repeatability in IMTP (ICC = 0.45-0.87) and SCR (ICC = 0.40-0.85), moderate to excellent repeatability in KF (left: ICC = 0.53-0.96; right: ICC = 0.61-0.92). PF reliability was excellent in IMTP (ICC = 0.93) and KF (left: ICC = 0.99; right: ICC = 0.97), and moderate in SCR (ICC = 0.64). RFD reliability was moderate to excellent in IMTP (ICC = 0.58-0.94), poor to good in SCR (ICC = 0.13-0.64), and poor to excellent in KF (left: ICC = 0.33-0.96; right: ICC = -0.19-0.95). This study shows that portable dynamometry can measure maximal and explosive strength in different exercises, demonstrating good reliability for most parameters in IMTP and KF.
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.