ArticlePeerJ2026
The reliability and validity of a visual analog scale for rating the single leg squat test.
Article in PeerJ, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The single leg squat test (SLST) is commonly used for visual movement assessment in subjects with lower extremity injuries. While current methods utilize ordinal rating categorization, adopting a visual analog scale (VAS) may offer potential advantages. The study aims to determine the intra-rater, inter-rater reliability, and validity of a visual analog scale (VAS) for rating the single leg squat test (SLST) in subjects with lower extremity injuries. Methods: 58 subjects with lower extremity injuries participated. Intra-rater reliability was assessed by a physical therapist at 1-week and 2-week intervals. Single session inter-rater reliability was assessed by two physical therapists. A 10 cm VAS was used to measure trunk lateral flexion, hip adduction, and dynamic knee valgus during the SLST. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) assessed intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Validity was assessed by comparing VAS scores to 2-D kinematic analysis. Results: Intra-rater reliability was good at both 1 week (ICC = 0.81-0.92, MDC = 1.2-2.2 cm) and 2 weeks (ICC = 0.77-0.79, MDC = 2.7-3 cm). Inter-rater reliability was good to excellent (ICC = 0.78-0.93, MDD = 1-2.6 cm). The correlation between visual assessment and 2-D kinematic analysis was moderate to good ( Conclusion: Preliminary data indicate that VAS reliably and validly rates SLST in individuals with lower-extremity injuries, allowing calculation of minimal detectable change and minimal detectable difference to support clinical interpretation. The MDC and MDD values established for trunk lateral flexion, hip adduction, and dynamic knee valgus allows clinicians to objectively determine if scores between repeated measurement and two raters are different.
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.