Reliability and Validity of Individual Finger Flexor Strength Measurement Using the Martin Vigorimeter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: While numerous tools exist for grip strength measurement, there is a lack of research for assessing the individual finger flexor strength. This study aimed to evaluate the test-retest reliability of measuring individual finger flexion strength in healthy adults using the smallest bulb of the Martin Vigorimeter (MV). METHODS: Grip strength of 100 adults without hand pathology was measured using the large bulb of the MV, while individual finger flexor strength was assessed using the small bulb. Measurements were repeated after 3 weeks to evaluate test-retest reliability. Contribution of each finger flexor was calculated and compared to the previously reported values obtained using specialized equipment or protocol. RESULTS: The MV showed excellent reliability for grip strength (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.9) and good-to-excellent reliability for individual finger flexor strength (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.805-0.914). The middle finger contributed the most (approximately 30%), followed by the index and ring fingers (25%-26%), which were comparable to values previously reported using specialized equipment or protocols. Normalized minimal detectable change values for finger flexor strength ranged from 9.7% to 14.2%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the smallest bulb of the MV is a reliable and accessible tool for measuring individual finger flexor strength in healthy adults, with results comparable to those obtained using specialized equipment or protocols.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".