Description and Intrarater Test–Retest Reliability of a Reverse-Action Method to Assess Ankle Evertor Muscle Performance: The I-to-V Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Reverse action (RA) of the ankle evertor muscle is when the proximal attachment moves toward the distal attachment, moving the lower leg in the frontal plane when the foot and ankle are fixed on the ground and inducing ankle eversion. The purpose of this study was to describe an RA method for measuring ankle evertor muscle performance. Method: Eighteen healthy individuals were recruited for this study. To assess the RA of their ankle evertors, the participants sat with their knees together and their feet firmly planted on the floor, then spread their knees as far apart as possible. A tester used a measuring tape to measured the distance (in cm) between the medial tibial tuberosity of the tested side and that of the non-tested side. In the end range position of the RA, ankle evertor electromyographic activity was recorded simultaneously. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated to establish the intrarater test–retest reliability. The correlation between each performance value and muscle activity was assessed using a linear correlation model. Results: The proposed method of assessing RA performance was highly reliable (ICC=0.95) and had a low SEM (1.63 cm); in addition, the performance value showed a strong positive correlation with ankle evertor muscle activity (ρ=0.90; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.95; p=0.01). Conclusions: The proposed RA method of assessing the ankle evertor muscles can be used as a simple, reliable, economical performance test. It can also be used as an alternate method of testing the peroneal muscles rather than selectively measuring ankle evertor performance because hip external rotation occurs when performing RA.
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 | 0.023 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".