ArticleCureus2025
A New Manual Alternative to the Ober Test: A Pilot Study of Precision and Accuracy in Healthy Young Adults.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of a new clinical test for assessing the hip adductor myofascial system and determine its accuracy by comparison with inertial sensor data. A diagnostic reliability study was conducted involving 46 healthy participants (92 limbs) aged 18-30 years. Each participant underwent a standardized assessment using a newly developed manual test for hip adduction, performed by two trained examiners during two separate sessions (T0 and T1). Inertial sensors were used to measure hip adduction angles as the reference standard. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Agreement between visual assessments and instrumented measurements was also analyzed. Post-hoc power calculations were performed for all ICC values. The new test demonstrated good intra-rater reliability, with ICC values of 0.881 for examiner 1 and 0.840 for examiner 2. Inter-rater reliability was also good, with ICC values of 0.888 at T0 and 0.886 at T1. Agreement between visual assessments and inertial sensor measurements was high, with ICC values of 0.898 for examiner 1 and 0.931 for examiner 2. Bland-Altman plots confirmed strong agreement across all comparisons, and power analyses showed sufficient sample size for all ICC calculations. The new test provides a reliable and accurate assessment of hip adductor myofascial extensibility, addressing key limitations of the Ober test. Its good intra- and inter-rater reliability, along with ease of use in clinical settings without instrumentation, make it a promising alternative. Future research should explore its application across diverse populations and its clinical correlation with iliotibial band-related pathologies.
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.