Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validation of manual muscle testing and a subset of eight muscles for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

Open access
Rider, Lisa G., Koziol, Deloris, Giannini, Edward H., Jain, Minal S., Smith, Michaele R., Whitney‐Mahoney, Kristi, Feldman, Brian M., Wright, Susan J., Lindsley, Carol B., Pachman, Lauren M., Villalba, Maria L., Lovell, Daniel J., Bowyer, Suzanne L., Plotz, Paul H., Miller, Frederick W., Hicks, Jeanne E.·2010·Arthritis Care & Research

Abstract

Objective: To validate manual muscle testing (MMT) for strength assessment in juvenile and adult dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM). Methods: Patients with PM/DM (73 children and 45 adults) were assessed at baseline and reevaluated 6–9 months later. We compared Total MMT (a group of 24 proximal, distal, and axial muscles) and Proximal MMT (7 proximal muscle groups) tested bilaterally on a 0–10 scale with 144 subsets of 6 and 96 subsets of 8 muscle groups tested unilaterally. Expert consensus was used to rank the best abbreviated MMT subsets for face validity and ease of assessment. Results: The Total, Proximal, and best MMT subsets had excellent internal reliability (Total MMT r s = 0.91–0.98), and consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.78–0.97). Inter‐ and intrarater reliability were acceptable (Kendall's W 0.68–0.76, r s = 0.84–0.95). MMT subset scores correlated highly with Total and Proximal MMT scores and with the Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale, and correlated moderately with physician global activity, functional disability, magnetic resonance imaging, and axial and distal MMT scores, and, in adults, with creatine kinase level. The standardized response mean for Total MMT was 0.56 in juveniles and 0.75 in adults. Consensus was reached to use a subset of 8 muscles (neck flexors, deltoids, biceps, wrist extensors, gluteus maximus and medius, quadriceps, and ankle dorsiflexors) that performed as well as the Total and Proximal MMT, and had good face validity and ease of assessment. Conclusion: These findings aid in standardizing the use of MMT for assessing strength as an outcome measure for myositis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acr.20035

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 277

Metadata

Authors
Rider, L. G., Koziol, D., Giannini, E. H., Jain, M. S., Smith, M. R., Whitney‐Mahoney, K., Feldman, B. M., Wright, S. J., Lindsley, C. B., Pachman, L. M., Villalba, M. L., Lovell, D. J., Bowyer, S. L., Plotz, P. H., Miller, F. W., & Hicks, J. E.
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-03-30
Volume
62
Issue
4
Pages
465-472
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-464X
  • 2151-4658
OpenAlex
W1972542512
Cited by
277
References
22
FWCI
7.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validation of manual muscle testing and a subset of eight muscles for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/acr.20035
The paper
Rider, L. G., Koziol, D., Giannini, E. H., Jain, M. S., Smith, M. R., Whitney‐Mahoney, K., Feldman, B. M., Wright, S. J., Lindsley, C. B., Pachman, L. M., Villalba, M. L., Lovell, D. J., Bowyer, S. L., Plotz, P. H., Miller, F. W., & Hicks, J. E. (2010). Validation of manual muscle testing and a subset of eight muscles for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Arthritis Care & Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20035

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.