ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
The validity and reliability of the six-minute pegboard and ring test for assessing upper extremity exercise capacity in individuals with overweight and obesity: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06742112 (Validity and Reliability of the 6-minute Pegboard and Ring Test in Assessing Upper Extremity Function in Overweight and Obese Individuals), which is not on this 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.
Validity and Reliability of the 6-minute Pegboard and Ring Test in Assessing Upper Extremity Function in Overweight and Obese Individuals
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh body mass is associated with functional limitations affecting both the lower and upper extremities. While the 6 min pegboard and ring test (6PBRT) is a validated measure of upper extremity exercise capacity in various clinical populations, its clinimetric properties across the broader spectrum of individuals with overweight and obesity remain to be fully established. The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and validity of the 6PBRT in individuals who are overweight and obesity.
methodsA sample of 51 participants (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m², aged 18–65 years) was included. Exercise capacity of the upper extremities, functional capacity, muscle function and upper extremity functional status were evaluated using the 6PBRT, 6 min walk test (6MWT), handgrip strength (HGS) and the 30-second push-up test and Upper Extremity Functional Index (UEFI), respectively. Reliability was analysed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and validity was examined by correlation analyses.
resultsThe 6PBRT showed good test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.884; 95% CI: 0.797–0.934; p < 0.001), and a substantial enhancement was evident when comparing the initial and subsequent tests (396.59 ± 60.77 vs. 432.59 ± 79.95; p < 0.001). Moderate correlations were observed between 6PBRT and 6MWT (r = 0.420, p = 0.002; r = 0.486, p < 0.001). In addition, weak but statistically significant correlations were found between the 6PBRT and dominant HGS (r = 0.292, p = 0.037; r = 0.291, p = 0.039), non-dominant HGS (r = 0.345, p = 0.013; r = 0.330, p = 0.018), 30-second push-up test (r = 0.302, p = 0.031; r = 0.332, r = 0.017) and UEFI scores (r = 0.366, p = 0.008; r = 0.331, p = 0.018).
conclusionsThe 6PBRT is a reliable and valid tool for evaluating exercise capacity in the upper extremities of individuals with overweight and obesity. It may also be useful for assessing functional performance in clinical and rehabilitation settings.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06742112), registered 2024.12.16.
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.