ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2026
Shoulder Internal and External Rotator Strength Reliability and Validity in Healthy Adolescent Athletes.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Handheld dynamometry (HHD) has been recommended in return-to-play (RTP) assessments following shoulder injuries; however, variations in testing methods limits interpretation of results. In contrast, isokinetic dynamometry is considered gold-standard for assessment of strength but is less accessible than HHD. Further assessment is needed to identify which shoulder HHD testing positions best reflect isokinetic dynamometry values and can be used to guide RTP practices in adolescent athletes. # Purpose To compare HHD strength values of shoulder internal rotators (IR) and external rotators (ER) to isokinetic values in healthy youth athletes. Study Design: Cross Sectional. Methods: Healthy, youth athletes aged 14-18 years with no history of upper extremity musculoskeletal or neuromuscular conditions or injuries in the prior six months were recruited from local teams, clubs, and youth sports organizations. Participants completed strength testing on dominant (DOM) and non-dominant (NON) limbs in three HHD testing positions: prone, seated, and supine. Isokinetic testing (Biodex) was completed seated at 60 degrees/second. Differences between Biodex measures and HHD conditions, as well as between HHD conditions, were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with effect sizes (r) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results: A total of 64 participants (37 male; 16.8±1.0 years) participating in primarily football, baseball, lacrosse, volleyball, and basketball were included for analysis. Seated HHD for IR differed from Biodex on both limbs (p<0.001) and from prone on the non-dominant limb (p<0.001). Between HHD positions for the IR's, seated differed from prone and supine bilaterally (DOM: p<0.001; NON: p<0.001). For the ER's, HHD measures differed from Biodex in all positions (DOM: p<0.001; NON: p<0.001). Between ER HHD positions, seated differed from prone and supine bilaterally (DOM: p<0.001; NON: p<0.001). Agreement between Biodex and HHD positions was consistently small for ER (DOM: ICCs=0.28-0.43; NON: 0.29-0.38) and was strongest in prone for IR (DOM: ICC=0.81, 95%CI=0.69-0.88; NON: ICC=0.84, 95%CI=0.65-0.92). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that HHD shows agreement with isokinetic dynamometry for strength of the shoulder IR's in adolescent athletes when assessed in prone or supine; however, HHD is poorly correlated with isokinetic strength measures of the ER's. # Level of Evidence 3.
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.