Tweet
Dear subscribers
Peter Sinclair (p.sinclair@usyd.edu.au) suggested two additional refs on
the topic of normative data on isometric knee joint torque: Scudder1980
and Knapik1983. I have also added the ref Keating1996 which is a review
of "more than 200 articles to evaluate in detail the effects of
variations in subject factors and test procedures on measurements". Ton
van den Bogert also pointed out an extraneous letter in Kuhlig -- the
corrected ref below. The case of older refs brings to mind a question I
have been pondering about now and then: There is danger that many good
old papers will become underrepresented in the literature citations
because their accessibility is worsening in relation to the more recent
online papers that are often only a couple of clicks away.
Best regards
Frank Borg
U of Jyväskylä, Chydenius Institute, Karleby, Finland
PS. As a sideline concerning an ongoing *flare* topic: *torque* is the
same thing as *moment of force* (il momento di una forza,
kraftmoment/vridmoment, drejningsmoment, dreiemoment, vääntömomentti,
Drehmoment, und so weiter ...). There are also other *moments* in
physics such as the moment of inertia. Speaking just about *moment* is
therefore sloppy language [but excusable when the meaning is clear from
the context] especially since we already have the short word *torque*
for the thing in English.
--- Bibliography adds BibTex format ----
@article{Scudder1980,
author = {G N Scudder GN},
title = {Torque curves produced at the knee during isometric and
isokinetic exercise},
journal = {Archives of Physical Medicine \& Rehabilitation},
volume = 61,
number = 2,
pages = {68-73},
year = 1980
}
@article{Knapik1983,
author = {J J Knapik and J E Wright amd R H Mawdsley and J Braun},
title = {Isometric, isotonic, and isokinetic torque variations in four
muscle groups through a range of joint motion},
journal = {Physical Therapy},
volume = 63,
number = 6,
pages = {938-947},
year = 1983
}
@article{Keating1996,
author = {Keating, JL and Matyas, TA},
title = {{The influence of subject and test design on dynamometric
measurements of extremity muscles}},
journal = {PHYS THER},
volume = {76},
number = {8},
pages = {866-889},
year = {1996},
abstract = {In the context of broader discussions of clinical
dynamometry, earlier reviews have raised concerns about the potential
effects of variations in subject factors and test procedures on
measurements. None, however, have dealt exclusively with these effects.
We therefore reviewed more than 200 articles to evaluate in detail the
effects of variations in subject factors and test procedures on
measurements. Factors relating to subjects that affected measurements
were age, gender, weight, athletic background, disability, and limb
dominance. Test conditions that led to variations in measurements were
range of movement in which values were obtained, type of contraction or
movement (concentric, eccentric, isokinetic, isometric, isotonic),
pretest procedures (warm-up and gravity-correction procedures, starting
position, stabilization, axes alignment, lever arm length, preload,
damp/ramp settings), test conditions (speed, test sequence, rest
intervals, feedback), and type of data analysis (the data selected and
how they are manipulated). In the majority of the publications, the
authors failed to provide sufficient detail for accurate replication of
test procedures or for comparison with other studies. We advocate that
the factors identified in this review be included whenever measurements
obtained with a dynamometer are reported. Effective development of
normative data, formation of ratios, comparison of measurements across
studies, and relating measurements with other performance criteria (eg,
measurements of functional performance) all require descriptions of
variables relating to subjects and testing. Similarly, meaningful use of
these measurements in clinical practice requires consideration and
documentation of these variables.
},
URL = {http://www.ptjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/76/8/866},
eprint = {http://www.ptjournal.org/cgi/reprint/76/8/866.pdf}
}
@incollection{Kulig1984,
author = {K Kulig and J G Andrews and others},
title = {Human Strength Curves},
editor = {R L Terjung},
booktitle = {Exercise and Sport Science Reviews},
pages = {417-466},
publisher = {Lexington: Collamore Press},
year = 1984
}
Peter Sinclair (p.sinclair@usyd.edu.au) suggested two additional refs on
the topic of normative data on isometric knee joint torque: Scudder1980
and Knapik1983. I have also added the ref Keating1996 which is a review
of "more than 200 articles to evaluate in detail the effects of
variations in subject factors and test procedures on measurements". Ton
van den Bogert also pointed out an extraneous letter in Kuhlig -- the
corrected ref below. The case of older refs brings to mind a question I
have been pondering about now and then: There is danger that many good
old papers will become underrepresented in the literature citations
because their accessibility is worsening in relation to the more recent
online papers that are often only a couple of clicks away.
Best regards
Frank Borg
U of Jyväskylä, Chydenius Institute, Karleby, Finland
PS. As a sideline concerning an ongoing *flare* topic: *torque* is the
same thing as *moment of force* (il momento di una forza,
kraftmoment/vridmoment, drejningsmoment, dreiemoment, vääntömomentti,
Drehmoment, und so weiter ...). There are also other *moments* in
physics such as the moment of inertia. Speaking just about *moment* is
therefore sloppy language [but excusable when the meaning is clear from
the context] especially since we already have the short word *torque*
for the thing in English.
--- Bibliography adds BibTex format ----
@article{Scudder1980,
author = {G N Scudder GN},
title = {Torque curves produced at the knee during isometric and
isokinetic exercise},
journal = {Archives of Physical Medicine \& Rehabilitation},
volume = 61,
number = 2,
pages = {68-73},
year = 1980
}
@article{Knapik1983,
author = {J J Knapik and J E Wright amd R H Mawdsley and J Braun},
title = {Isometric, isotonic, and isokinetic torque variations in four
muscle groups through a range of joint motion},
journal = {Physical Therapy},
volume = 63,
number = 6,
pages = {938-947},
year = 1983
}
@article{Keating1996,
author = {Keating, JL and Matyas, TA},
title = {{The influence of subject and test design on dynamometric
measurements of extremity muscles}},
journal = {PHYS THER},
volume = {76},
number = {8},
pages = {866-889},
year = {1996},
abstract = {In the context of broader discussions of clinical
dynamometry, earlier reviews have raised concerns about the potential
effects of variations in subject factors and test procedures on
measurements. None, however, have dealt exclusively with these effects.
We therefore reviewed more than 200 articles to evaluate in detail the
effects of variations in subject factors and test procedures on
measurements. Factors relating to subjects that affected measurements
were age, gender, weight, athletic background, disability, and limb
dominance. Test conditions that led to variations in measurements were
range of movement in which values were obtained, type of contraction or
movement (concentric, eccentric, isokinetic, isometric, isotonic),
pretest procedures (warm-up and gravity-correction procedures, starting
position, stabilization, axes alignment, lever arm length, preload,
damp/ramp settings), test conditions (speed, test sequence, rest
intervals, feedback), and type of data analysis (the data selected and
how they are manipulated). In the majority of the publications, the
authors failed to provide sufficient detail for accurate replication of
test procedures or for comparison with other studies. We advocate that
the factors identified in this review be included whenever measurements
obtained with a dynamometer are reported. Effective development of
normative data, formation of ratios, comparison of measurements across
studies, and relating measurements with other performance criteria (eg,
measurements of functional performance) all require descriptions of
variables relating to subjects and testing. Similarly, meaningful use of
these measurements in clinical practice requires consideration and
documentation of these variables.
},
URL = {http://www.ptjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/76/8/866},
eprint = {http://www.ptjournal.org/cgi/reprint/76/8/866.pdf}
}
@incollection{Kulig1984,
author = {K Kulig and J G Andrews and others},
title = {Human Strength Curves},
editor = {R L Terjung},
booktitle = {Exercise and Sport Science Reviews},
pages = {417-466},
publisher = {Lexington: Collamore Press},
year = 1984
}