ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
Concurrent validity and agreement of the HerniaCare Lab device for abdominal wall strength assessment.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrently, no standardized, low-cost, and portable method is available for assessing abdominal wall strength in patients with incisional hernias, addressing the limitations of traditional dynamometry.
methodsThis cross-sectional validation study compared the HerniaCare Lab device performance with the Activforce 2 hand-held dynamometer in92 adults diagnosed with abdominal wall hernias. Isometric trunk flexion strength was measured under identical conditions, and agreement between devices was analyzed using non-parametric tests, correlation, and concordance statistics.
resultsThe HerniaCare Lab showed systematically higher strength values than the Activforce 2 (mean difference = + 22.3 N, p < 0.001) but demonstrated a very strong positive correlation (ρ = 0.95, p < 0.001) and good concordance (CCC = 0.89). Bland–Altman analysis revealed a mean bias of + 24.9 N with 95% limits of agreement from − 17.7 to+ 67.5 N, and a slight proportional bias at higher force levels.
conclusionDespite predictable overestimation, the HerniaCare Lab exhibits strong concurrent validity and good agreement with an established reference device, supporting its potential clinical utility for objective, reproducible, and accessible assessment of abdominal wall strength in surgical populations.
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.