Normative Values for the Unsupported Upper Limb Exercise Test and 6-Minute Pegboard and Ring Test in Healthy Canadian Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: We determined normative values for the Unsupported Upper Limb Exercise (UULEX) test and the 6-Minute Pegboard and Ring Test (6PBRT) in a sample of healthy Canadian adults aged 40–89 years. Method: Volunteers completed the UULEX test and the 6PBRT twice with an interval of 30 minutes between tests or after the variables of interest had returned to their baseline values. Results: A total of 97 volunteers completed the tests (53.4% female); their mean age was 64.3 (SD 13.9) years. Mean UULEX scores were 11.4 (SD 3.0) minutes for women and 12.4 (SD 2.5) minutes for men. The mean 6PBRT score was 404.7 (SD 100.1) rings moved. For both tests, younger individuals’ scores were higher. As volunteers’ age increased, their functional performance on both tests was reduced: UULEX, r = –0.50 ( p = 0.001), and 6PBRT, r = –0.60 ( p = 0.001). Conclusions: These normative values increase the usefulness of these tests as measures of upper limb function.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".