Grip strength reference values for Canadians aged 6 to 79: Canadian Health Measures Survey, 2007 to 2013.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Grip strength is a measure of overall muscular strength and has been associated with disability, morbidity and mortality. Normative data are used to interpret an individual's grip strength measurements, but Canadian reference values are not available for a wide age range. DATA AND METHODS: The data pertain to 11,108 respondents aged 6 to 79 to the 2007-to-2013 Canadian Health Measures Survey, whose right-hand and left-hand grip strength were measured with a handgrip dynamometer. Quantile regression was used to develop reference equations for males and females for maximum, right-hand and left-hand grip strength for selected percentiles as a function of age, height and weight. RESULTS: Reference values for grip strength increased through childhood and adolescence, peaked around age 40, and then declined. Reference values were higher for males than for females; differences between the sexes were smaller during childhood than in adolescence and adulthood. Differences between reference values for maximum, right-hand and left-hand grip strength varied by age and sex. INTERPRETATION: Based on a large, healthy, nationally representative sample, reference equations were developed for grip strength of Canadians from childhood to older adulthood. These equations can be used to determine the reference values that correspond to an individual of a given age, sex, height and weight.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".