Reliability and validity of field-based tests for assessing physical fitness in gymnasts

IF 1.1 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES
Jorge Salse-Batán , Silvia Varela , Adrián García-Fresneda , Carlos Ayán
{"title":"Reliability and validity of field-based tests for assessing physical fitness in gymnasts","authors":"Jorge Salse-Batán ,&nbsp;Silvia Varela ,&nbsp;Adrián García-Fresneda ,&nbsp;Carlos Ayán","doi":"10.1016/j.apunsm.2022.100397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This systematic review aimed at analysing the reliability and validity of field-based tests for assessing physical fitness in gymnasts.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Three electronic databases (PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus) were searched up to March 2022, in order to identify studies that assessed the psychometric properties of field-based physical fitness test among gymnastics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 16 studies on several gymnastics modalities (artistics <em>n</em> = 11; rhythmic <em>n</em> = 3, artistics and rhythmic <em>n</em> = 1; aerobic <em>n</em> =  1), were analyzed. All studies reported on reliability measured through test-retest design. Validity was reported in only four studies. Regarding specific tests, the split test (ICC = 0.998), and the handstand (ICC= 1) showed the highest test-retest reliability. The greater validity values were achieved by the split test (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.52), hanging pikes test (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.86), and handstand test (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.65).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>A great variety of both specific and non-specific physical fitness tests have been analyzed in the field of gymnastics. The side split test, the handstand test, the vertical jump test, the 20-m run test, the agility test, and the aerobic gymnast anaerobic test could be useful tools to assess flexibility, strength, balance, muscular power, speed, agility, and cardiorespiratory fitness in gymnasts. Further investigations analyzing absolute reliability and criterion validity are needed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100113,"journal":{"name":"Apunts Sports Medicine","volume":"57 216","pages":"Article 100397"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666506922000190/pdfft?md5=3efb092f0757487a80ec51c5235ff7ee&pid=1-s2.0-S2666506922000190-main.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Apunts Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666506922000190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective

This systematic review aimed at analysing the reliability and validity of field-based tests for assessing physical fitness in gymnasts.

Method

Three electronic databases (PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus) were searched up to March 2022, in order to identify studies that assessed the psychometric properties of field-based physical fitness test among gymnastics.

Results

A total of 16 studies on several gymnastics modalities (artistics n = 11; rhythmic n = 3, artistics and rhythmic n = 1; aerobic n =  1), were analyzed. All studies reported on reliability measured through test-retest design. Validity was reported in only four studies. Regarding specific tests, the split test (ICC = 0.998), and the handstand (ICC= 1) showed the highest test-retest reliability. The greater validity values were achieved by the split test (r2 = 0.52), hanging pikes test (r2 = 0.86), and handstand test (r2 = 0.65).

Conclusion

A great variety of both specific and non-specific physical fitness tests have been analyzed in the field of gymnastics. The side split test, the handstand test, the vertical jump test, the 20-m run test, the agility test, and the aerobic gymnast anaerobic test could be useful tools to assess flexibility, strength, balance, muscular power, speed, agility, and cardiorespiratory fitness in gymnasts. Further investigations analyzing absolute reliability and criterion validity are needed.

体操运动员体能测试的信度和效度
目的分析现场测试评价体操运动员体能水平的信度和效度。方法检索截至2022年3月的PubMed、SPORTDiscus和Scopus 3个电子数据库,以确定评估体操运动员实地体能测试心理测量特性的研究。结果共16项关于几种体操形式(艺术)的研究 = 11;节奏学 = 3,艺术与节奏学 = 1;好氧n = 1)进行分析。所有研究都报告了通过重测设计测量的信度。只有四项研究报告了有效性。具体检验方面,分裂检验(ICC = 0.998)和倒立检验(ICC= 1)的重测信度最高。分离检验(r2 = 0.52)、挂矛检验(r2 = 0.86)和倒立检验(r2 = 0.65)的效度值较高。结论在体操运动中,对各种专项和非专项体能测试进行了分析。侧裂测试、倒立测试、垂直跳跃测试、20米跑测试、敏捷性测试和有氧体操运动员无氧测试可以作为评估体操运动员柔韧性、力量、平衡、肌肉力量、速度、敏捷性和心肺健康的有用工具。需要进一步的研究,分析标准的绝对信度和效度。
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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信