ArticleArchives of physiotherapy
Mastering the use of hand-held dynamometry in clinical practice.
Article in Archives of physiotherapy. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measures of muscle performance, such as strength and the rate of force development (RFD), are important for function, rehabilitation, and successful aging. Clinicians seeking to use objective measurement methods of muscle performance in support of their assessments and rehabilitation programs have many affordable dynamometry options. However, substantive differences exist between devices on important characteristics such as sampling frequency, load capacity and determining force onset, which dramatically affect the ability to obtain accurate estimates of muscle performance. The assessment environment and setup also require careful consideration. Busy clinicians are often unaware of the extent to which methodological variability and inconsistencies in testing protocols can inflate measurement error and render tests insensitive to change. Where data inform treatment and return-to-play decisions (vs. motivational aid), ensuring validity and reliability is paramount, particularly given that clinicians typically assess individual, not group performance. This is because ascertaining change or difference in intra-individual performance demands a greater level of measurement precision compared to assessing performance between groups of people. This evidence-informed Masterclass will exemplify some of the critical technical and methodological factors that intrude on measurement accuracy. It will provide readers with the knowledge: how to critically evaluate the utility of dynamometers, answering the question, which to buy and why? How to construct assessment protocols to improve quality data collection, and how to understand what constitutes real change in performance beyond "differences" caused by measurement error.
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.