The Development and Content of Movement Quality Assessments in Athletic Populations: A Systematic Review and Multilevel Meta-Analysis.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Gyan A Wijekulasuriya, Carl T Woods, Aden Kittel, Paul Larkin
{"title":"The Development and Content of Movement Quality Assessments in Athletic Populations: A Systematic Review and Multilevel Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Gyan A Wijekulasuriya, Carl T Woods, Aden Kittel, Paul Larkin","doi":"10.1186/s40798-025-00813-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite their prominence in the sport and human movement sciences, to date, there is no systematic insight about the development and content of movement quality assessments in athletic populations. This is an important gap to address, as it could yield both practical and scientific implications related to the continued screening of movement quality in athletic contexts. Hence, this study aimed to systematically review the (i) developmental approach, (ii) movements included, (iii) scoring system utilised, and (iv) the reliability of movement competency assessments used in athletic populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases (SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus) were searched for relevant articles up to 12 May 2023. Studies were included if they reported data about the developmental approach, movements included, scoring system utilised and reliability of assessment in an athletic population. A modified Downs and Black checklist was used to measure study quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From a total of 131 identified studies: (i) 26 (20%) described the developmental approach of an assessment; (ii) 113 (86%) included descriptions of the movements included; (iii) 106 (81%) included a description of scoring system and criteria; and (iv) 77 (59%) studies included reliability statistics. There were 36 assessments identified within these studies, comprising 59 movements in total. Each assessment scored movement quality through a Likert or binary classification system.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>First, the results demonstrate that choosing an appropriate movement quality assessment in an athletic population may be a complex process for practitioners as the development approach, movements included and scoring criteria vary substantially between assessments. Second, academics could use these results to help design new assessments for novel applications that meet rigour and reliability requirements. Third, these results have the potential to foster guidelines of use for the reliable assessment of movement quality in athletic populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":21788,"journal":{"name":"Sports Medicine - Open","volume":"11 1","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11757847/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Medicine - Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-025-00813-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite their prominence in the sport and human movement sciences, to date, there is no systematic insight about the development and content of movement quality assessments in athletic populations. This is an important gap to address, as it could yield both practical and scientific implications related to the continued screening of movement quality in athletic contexts. Hence, this study aimed to systematically review the (i) developmental approach, (ii) movements included, (iii) scoring system utilised, and (iv) the reliability of movement competency assessments used in athletic populations.

Methods: Electronic databases (SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus) were searched for relevant articles up to 12 May 2023. Studies were included if they reported data about the developmental approach, movements included, scoring system utilised and reliability of assessment in an athletic population. A modified Downs and Black checklist was used to measure study quality.

Results: From a total of 131 identified studies: (i) 26 (20%) described the developmental approach of an assessment; (ii) 113 (86%) included descriptions of the movements included; (iii) 106 (81%) included a description of scoring system and criteria; and (iv) 77 (59%) studies included reliability statistics. There were 36 assessments identified within these studies, comprising 59 movements in total. Each assessment scored movement quality through a Likert or binary classification system.

Conclusion: First, the results demonstrate that choosing an appropriate movement quality assessment in an athletic population may be a complex process for practitioners as the development approach, movements included and scoring criteria vary substantially between assessments. Second, academics could use these results to help design new assessments for novel applications that meet rigour and reliability requirements. Third, these results have the potential to foster guidelines of use for the reliable assessment of movement quality in athletic populations.

运动人群运动质量评估的发展与内容:系统回顾与多水平元分析。
背景:尽管他们在运动和人体运动科学中占有突出地位,但迄今为止,还没有关于运动人群运动质量评估的发展和内容的系统见解。这是一个需要解决的重要差距,因为它可以产生与运动环境中运动质量的持续筛选相关的实际和科学意义。因此,本研究旨在系统地回顾(i)发展方法,(ii)包括的运动,(iii)使用的评分系统,以及(iv)运动人群中使用的运动能力评估的可靠性。方法:检索截至2023年5月12日的电子数据库(SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus)的相关文章。如果研究报告了在运动人群中有关发展方法、运动、使用的评分系统和评估可靠性的数据,则纳入研究。采用改良的Downs和Black检查表来衡量研究质量。结果:在131项已确定的研究中:(i) 26项(20%)描述了评估的发展性方法;(ii) 113项(86%)包含对所包含动作的描述;(iii) 106(81%)包括对评分系统和标准的描述;(iv) 77项(59%)研究包含信度统计。在这些研究中确定了36种评估,总共包括59种运动。每个评估都通过李克特或二元分类系统对运动质量进行评分。结论:首先,结果表明,在运动人群中选择合适的运动质量评估对从业者来说可能是一个复杂的过程,因为不同评估的发展方法、包括的运动和评分标准存在很大差异。其次,学者们可以利用这些结果来帮助设计新的评估,以满足严格和可靠性要求的新应用。第三,这些结果有可能促进对运动人群的运动质量进行可靠评估的指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sports Medicine - Open
Sports Medicine - Open SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
142
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信