Isometric Muscle Strength in Youth Assessed by Hand-held Dynamometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine, with respect to measurement of maximal isometric torque (MIT) using a specific hand-held dynamometer (HHD) protocol, (1) protocol feasibility over a wide age range, (2) intra- and interrater reliability, (3) standard error of measurement, and (4) concurrent validity. METHODS: The MIT of selected upper and lower limb muscle groups was assessed (n = 74; age = 4-17.5 years) using a standardized, HHD protocol. Testing was repeated in 20 adolescents (n = 10 for each muscle group), who were also assessed with a Cybex dynamometer. RESULTS: The protocol was feasible for all participants. Mean intra- and interrater reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)] varied from 0.75 to 0.98, except for ankle dorsiflexor interrater reliability (mean ICC = 0.67). The standard error of measurement varied from 0.5 to 4.9 Nm and was highest for hip extensors. Mean concurrent validity (ICC) varied from 0.78 to 0.93, except for ankle plantar flexors (mean ICC = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Our HHD protocol was feasible over a wide age range and most MIT values were valid and reliable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".