Table 5. Strength asymmetry thresholds used by the included articles (N = 53) and the evidence level of each threshold applied in the methodology of the study. |
Article |
Strength Asymmetry Threshold |
Applied in methods? (Y/N) |
Evidence Tier |
Bourne et al., (2015) |
Investigated asymmetries above and below 10%, 15% and 20% |
Y |
1 |
Dos’Santos et al., (2017a) |
Threshold: mean + (0.2 SD of the mean)
Above the threshold = abnormal
Below the threshold = normal |
Y |
1 |
Dos'Santos et al., (2018) |
Threshold: mean + (0.2 SD of the mean)
Above the threshold = abnormal
Below the threshold = normal |
Y |
1 |
Lockie et al., (2014) |
Threshold: mean + (0.2 SD of the mean).
Above the threshold = greater asymmetry group
Below the threshold = lesser asymmetry group |
Y |
1 |
Opar et al., (2015) |
Investigated asymmetries above and below 10%, 15% and 20% |
Y |
1 |
Holsgaard-Larsen et al., (2014) |
Symmetry <85% and >115%=abnormal |
Y |
2 |
Fältström et al., (2017) |
Symmetry <90% and >110% = abnormal |
Y |
3 |
Guney-Deniz et al., (2020) |
Symmetry ≥90% = normal |
Y |
3 |
Menzel et al., (2013) |
Asymmetry >15% = abnormal |
Y |
3 |
Abourezk et al., (2017) |
Symmetry ≥90% = normal
Symmetry <85% = abnormal |
Y |
4 |
Almeida et al., (2019) |
Symmetry >10% = abnormal |
Y |
4 |
Ardern et al., (2015) |
Presence of deficits on at least 2 of the following criteria:
Bilateral concentric hamstring peak torque ratio of 0.86
Bilateral eccentric hamstring peak torque ratio of 0.86
Concentric hamstring-quadriceps ratio of 0.47
Mixed ratio of 0.80
|
Y |
4 |
Batty et al., (2019) |
Symmetry ≥90% = normal |
Y |
4 |
Clark &Mullally, (2019) |
Asymmetry >10% = abnormal |
Y |
4 |
de Lira et al., (2017) |
Asymmetry >15% = abnormal |
Y |
4 |
Hadzic et al., (2014) |
Asymmetry >15% = abnormal |
Y |
4 |
Welling et al., (2019) |
Symmetry >90% normal |
Y |
4 |
Zwolski et al., (2015) |
Symmetry ≥90% = High quadriceps strength group
Symmetry <90% = Low quadriceps strength group |
Y |
4 |
Chmielewski et al., (2014) |
Symmetry ≥85-90% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Costa Silva et al., (2015) |
Asymmetry <15% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Dai et al., (2019) |
Asymmetry <10% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe et al., (2015) |
Asymmetry >10-15% = abnormal |
N |
n/a |
Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe et al., (2016) |
Asymmetry ≤10-15% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Harput et al., (2018) |
Symmetry ≥90% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Lisee et al., (2019) |
Symmetry ≥90% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Lockie et al., (2012) |
Asymmetry ≥15% = abnormal |
N |
n/a |
Lockie et al., (2016) |
Asymmetry >15% = abnormal |
N |
n/a |
Miles et al., (2019) |
Asymmetry <10-15% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Xergia et al., (2013) |
Symmetry ≥90% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Zwolski et al., (2016) |
Symmetry >90% = normal |
N |
n/a |
Ageberg & Roos, (2016) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Benjanuvatra et al., (2013) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Bishop et al., (2019c) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Bishop et al., (2019d) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Bookbinder et al., (2020) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Carabello et al., (2010) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Coratella et al., (2018) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Hart et al., (2014) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Hiemstra et al., (2008) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Hubbard et al., (2007) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Hughes et al., (2019) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Kaminska et al., (2015) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Lloyd et al., (2020) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Lockie et al., (2013) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Madruga-Parera et al., (2019) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Madruga-Perera et al., (2020) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Maloney et al., (2017) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Peebles et al., (2019) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Redden et al., (2018) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Reid et al., (2007) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Riemann & Davies, (2019) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Suchomel et al., (2016) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
Vanderstukken et al., (2019) |
- |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Y = Yes, N = No, n/a = not applicable, 1 = article provides the origin of the evidence for the threshold, 2 = article directly cites the origin of the evidence, 3 = article indirectly cites the origin of the evidence, 4 = article fails to provide or cite the origin of the evidence |
|