ArticleJournal of translational medicine2026
Handgrip strength in children, adolescents, and young adults with suspected myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) in children and young people (CYP) lacks validated diagnostic biomarkers. Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is central to case definitions and is usually assessed by patient report. We evaluated the feasibility and clinical value of handgrip strength (HGS) testing in PEM-reporting CYP referred for suspected ME/CFS.
methodsIn this prospective observational study at the Munich Chronic Fatigue Center for Young People (November 2022-November 2024), 147 patients (10-25 years) referred for the assessment of ME/CFS with positive DSQ-PEM screening and 83 healthy controls (HC) completed two HGS sessions (10 maximal grips/session; 3-s contraction/5-s rest; 60-minute inter-session break) using a digital dynamometer. We derived maximal force (Fmax), mean force (Fmean), fatigue ratio (FR = Fmax/Fmean), and recovery ratio (RR = Fmean session 2 / session 1). Analyses used repeated-measures ANCOVA, linear regression, partial Spearman correlations (adjusted for sex, age, and BMI), and proportional odds models for group membership (HC, noME/CFS, ME/CFS), reporting accuracy, and the C-statistic. Sensitivity analyses compared noME/CFS with confirmed CCC-ME/CFS.
resultsAfter clinical work-up, 84/147 (57%) patients were classified as ME/CFS (confirmed or probable) and 63/147 (43%) as noME/CFS. HGS test completion rate was high (session 1: 146/147, 99.3%; session 2: 142/147, 96.6%). Compared with HC, patients had substantially lower HGS (mean difference -9.93 kg, 95% CI: -12.00 to -7.85), and HGS indices correlated modestly with physical functioning (SF-12 PCS), but not with PEM duration. Both noME/CFS and ME/CFS groups differed from HC in absolute strength indices (Fmean, Fmax) and FR. RR differed between ME/CFS and HC, whereas no HGS index significantly separated noME/CFS from ME/CFS. In proportional odds models, each HGS index improved fit (all p < 0.001), but discrimination across HC, noME/CFS, and ME/CFS patients was moderate (accuracy 49.2-57.3% vs no-information rate 36.5%, with best performance for Fmean in session 2). In the CCC-restricted sensitivity analysis, discrimination between confirmed CCC-ME/CFS and noME/CFS was moderate (accuracy 62.8-70.7%; C-statistic 0.63-0.73), with best performance for absolute strength indices and RR.
conclusionsStandardized two-session repeated HGS testing is feasible in CYP with chronic fatigue and self-reported PEM and provides an objective marker of functional impairment that aligns with physical health status but not with PEM duration. However, HGS alone shows limited ability to discriminate ME/CFS from other fatiguing noME/CFS conditions. HGS may be useful for quantitative phenotyping, patient stratification, and longitudinal outcome assessment rather than as a standalone diagnostic biomarker.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.