ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2026
Concurrent Validity of Isokinetic Hip and Knee Strength Measurements Using the UGO Exoskeleton in Healthy Young Adults: Cross-Sectional Validation Study.
Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 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
backgroundThe UGO lower limb exoskeleton rehabilitation robot is designed for patients with lower limb motor dysfunction, and it can be used to assess the peak torque of hip and knee flexors and extensors.
objectiveThe primary aim of this study was to establish the concurrent validity of peak isokinetic torque using the UGO exoskeleton and Humac Norm dynamometers in healthy young adults.
methodsTwenty healthy young adults were enrolled in this study. All participants underwent isokinetic muscle strength tests using both the UGO exoskeleton and the Humac Norm dynamometers. Peak torque (Nm) of the hip and knee flexors and extensors was measured. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to determine concurrent validity. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the agreement between the 2 devices.
resultsAt the knee, peak torque of the extensors measured by the UGO exoskeleton correlated strongly with that measured by the Humac Norm dynamometer (right: r=0.662; P=.001; left: r=0.768; P<.001), with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) ranging from -22.89 to 82.21 Nm and from -24.60 to 75.65 Nm, respectively; the right knee flexors showed a moderate correlation (r=0.547; P=.01), with 95% LoA ranging from -26.27 to 36.01 Nm, whereas the left knee flexors showed no significant association (r=0.347; P=.12), with 95% LoA ranging from -2.40 to 75.02 Nm. At the hip, peak torque of the flexors correlated strongly on the right (r=0.615; P=.003) and moderately on the left (r=0.443; P=.04), with 95% LoA ranging from -15.52 to 86.57 Nm and from -12.53 to 98.50 Nm, respectively, whereas the bilateral hip extensors showed no significant association (right: r=0.337; P=.14; left: r=0.391; P=.20), with 95% LoA ranging from -51.57 to 76.80 Nm and from -28.19 to 79.59 Nm, respectively.
conclusionsIn healthy young adults, the UGO exoskeleton demonstrated moderate to strong concurrent validity for peak torque of the bilateral knee extensors and hip flexors, but not for the nondominant knee flexors or bilateral hip extensors. The device may serve as a convenient torque assessment tool for selected muscle actions, but systematic overestimation and posture-related differences must be considered, and validation in the intended clinical population of patients with neurological conditions is required in further studies.
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.