Table 3.

Characteristics of skeletal muscle strength tests.

Type	Author, Country	Outcomes	Methods	Apparatus	Site
Isometric test	Alcazar et al. (21), Spain	Leg press (N)	Evaluate two legs performance, test for at least 4s	Force plate	Lower limb
	Chen et al. (33), China	Quadriceps (Nm)	Evaluate the maximal strength of dominant leg	Computerized dynamometer	Lower limb
	Janaudis-Ferreira et al. (35), Canada	Biceps (kg) Triceps (kg) Anterior (kg) Middle deltoids (kg)	Evaluate the dominant side by Micro FET2, the average of the highest 3 measures were used for analysis	Hand-held dynamometer	Upper limb
	Nakamura et al. (45), Japan	HGF (kg)	Evaluate the dominant side	Hand-grip dynamometer	Upper limb
	Wadell et al. (48), Canada	Knee extension (kg)		Fixed dynamometer	Lower limb
	van Wetering et al. (47), Netherlands	HGF (kg) Quadriceps (Nm)		Unknown device	Upper limb Lower limb
Isotonic test	Casaburi et al. (31), USA	Leg press (kg)	Evaluate two legs performance by 1RM test	Pneumatic device	Lower limb
	Clark et al. (32), Scotland	Quadriceps (kg)	1RM test	Multigym
	Hoff et al. (34), USA	Leg press (kg)	1RM test	Force platform
	O'shea et al. (37), Australia	Knee extension (kg) Hip abduction (kg) Shoulder horizontal flexion (kg) Shoulder flexion (kg)	Averaged across right and left limbs were used for analysis	Hand-held dynamometry	Lower limb Lower limb Upper limb Upper limb
	Simpson et al. (39), Canada	Elbow flexion (kg) Quadriceps (kg) Leg press (kg)	Unilateral 1RM test	Unknown device	Upper limb Lower limb
	Zambom-Ferraresi et al. (40), Spain	Leg press (kg) Chest press (kg)	1RM test	Force plate	Lower limb Upper limb
Isokinetic test	Chen et al. (33), China	Quadriceps (Nm)	Evaluate the maximal strength of dominant leg	Computerized dynamometer	Lower limb
	Nyberg et al. (36), Sweden	Shoulder flexion (Nm) Knee extension (Nm)	The highest of 5 maximal contractions was used for analysis	Computerized dynamometer	Upper limb Lower limb

Kg, Kilogram; HGF, Handgrip force; N, Newton; RM, Repetition maximum.