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:
|
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