Reliability and Validity of Shoulder and Handgrip Strength Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to estimate the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the JTECH computerized, wireless apparatus and its validity (compared to established devices) for measurements of maximal shoulder isometric strength and handgrip strength among healthy adults with no shoulder pathology. Methods: Twenty healthy young adults had shoulder strength tested with JTECH and Micro-FET2 hand-held dynamometers, and the handgrip strength was tested using JTECH and Jamar handgrip dynamometers. Assessments were performed by the same rater to determine intra-rater reliability and convergent validity, at least two days apart, while on a third visit, the other rater performed measures to determine inter-rater reliability. Results: The JTECH computerized, wireless devices demonstrated good to excellent intra-rater reliability (ICCs (2,1) = 0.78–0.97) and inter-rater reliability for strength measures (ICCs (2,1) = 0.76–0.95). The JTECH computerized device compared to the Micro-FET2 hand-held dynamometer showed substantial concurrent validity for shoulder flexion ( R 2 = 0.87), extension ( R 2 = 0.87), abduction ( R 2 = 0.88), and adduction ( R 2 = 0.85). Substantial concurrent validity was shown for the JTECH computerized device and Jamar handgrip dynamometers ( R 2 = 0.92). Conclusions: The JTECH computerized, wireless devices demonstrated high intra- and inter-rater reliability and substantial concurrent validity for shoulder isometric strength and handgrip strength in healthy adults.
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 | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".