ArticleScientific reports2025
End-digit preference of readings of grip strength measured with analogue-display devices.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Grip strength is frequently measured with analogue dynamometers graded to the nearest 2 kg. The end digits of such measurements should be even numbers or zero with frequency of 20% each. The accuracy of the grip strength measurements was never assessed for the possible end digit preference. We aimed to assess the end digit preference in the measurements of grip strength and the possible differences between examiners experienced and inexperienced in geriatrics. We did a retrospective analysis of grip strength data previously gathered. Data were recorded by two teams of examiners who performed grip strength measurements, using analogue devices, in older hospitalized patients. Team A consisted of geriatricians or physiotherapists working in the geriatric care setting. Team B consisted of physiotherapists without special experience in geriatrics who received a short, standardized instruction. We analysed a total of 251 (37.8% by team experienced in geriatrics) measurements. Grip strength was recorded with significant end digit preference leading to biased results. This was especially true of non-geriatric as opposed to geriatric trained examiners. Overall, values measured by Team A were 8.3 times more likely to end, correctly, on even digit or zero than end digits recorded by Team B (OR 8.3, 95%CI 2.9-25.0, p < 0.0001). We demonstrated a significant end digit preference, predominantly in examiners without experience in geriatrics. Standardized training and constant quality checks but also training in the importance of accuracy and the importance of muscular assessment in older patients are needed to ensure correct recording of grip strength values.
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.