ArticleScientific reports2026
The STS test and its correlation with common clinical indicators for an Argentinian population sample.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study assesses the Sit-To-Stand (STS) power across different age groups, and revises the biomechanical basis of existing power equations. Cross-sectional data from 159 Argentinian individuals (18 to 90 years) were analyzed, including 5 repetitions STS, ultrasonography, handgrip and leg press tests. Regression analysis and statistical hypothesis tests where used to find correlations and differences within obtained data. A large correlation ([Formula: see text]) was observed between average power and root mean squared (RMS) power, suggesting that existing mean power equations are clinically sufficient, as inertial effects are negligible. STS power peaked at approximately ([Formula: see text]) years, followed by a decline. The strongest correlations were found for peak leg press force ([Formula: see text]) and leg press rate of force development ([Formula: see text]). STS power correlated significantly with handgrip strength but not with the echogenicity index, highlighting the clinical relevance of separately evaluating each of these indicators.
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.