自动视频系统与系留系统测量瞬时游泳速度的一致性。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Michelle Scott, Nathan Elsworthy, Victoria Brackley, Marc Elipot, Crystal O Kean
{"title":"自动视频系统与系留系统测量瞬时游泳速度的一致性。","authors":"Michelle Scott, Nathan Elsworthy, Victoria Brackley, Marc Elipot, Crystal O Kean","doi":"10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Successful performance in competitive swimming requires a swimmer to maximise propulsion and minimise drag, which can be assessed using instantaneous swimming velocity. Many systems exist to quantify velocity, and therefore, it is important to understand the agreement between systems. This study examined the agreement between an automated video-based system and a tethered system to measure instantaneous velocity. Twenty-two competitive swimmers (state level or higher) completed 25 m of each stroke at maximal intensity. The tethered speedometer was attached to the swimmer's waist, while videos of each trial were recorded. The swimmer's head was then automatically tracked using proprietary software, and instantaneous velocity was determined from each system. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the two systems in backstroke (95% Limits of Agreement (LOA): -0.24-0.26 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (95% LOA: -0.36-0.38 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) but poorer agreement in butterfly (95% LOA: -0.51-0.53 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (95% LOA: -0.88-0.92 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). The root mean square error was higher in butterfly (0.27 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (0.46 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) compared to backstroke (0.13 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (0.19 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). Results demonstrated that the two systems are comparable for measuring instantaneous swimming velocity; however, larger discrepancies are evident for butterfly and breaststroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":49482,"journal":{"name":"Sports Biomechanics","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agreement between an automated video-based system and tethered system to measure instantaneous swimming velocity.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Scott, Nathan Elsworthy, Victoria Brackley, Marc Elipot, Crystal O Kean\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Successful performance in competitive swimming requires a swimmer to maximise propulsion and minimise drag, which can be assessed using instantaneous swimming velocity. Many systems exist to quantify velocity, and therefore, it is important to understand the agreement between systems. This study examined the agreement between an automated video-based system and a tethered system to measure instantaneous velocity. Twenty-two competitive swimmers (state level or higher) completed 25 m of each stroke at maximal intensity. The tethered speedometer was attached to the swimmer's waist, while videos of each trial were recorded. The swimmer's head was then automatically tracked using proprietary software, and instantaneous velocity was determined from each system. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the two systems in backstroke (95% Limits of Agreement (LOA): -0.24-0.26 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (95% LOA: -0.36-0.38 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) but poorer agreement in butterfly (95% LOA: -0.51-0.53 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (95% LOA: -0.88-0.92 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). The root mean square error was higher in butterfly (0.27 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and breaststroke (0.46 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) compared to backstroke (0.13 m.s<sup>-1</sup>) and freestyle (0.19 m.s<sup>-1</sup>). Results demonstrated that the two systems are comparable for measuring instantaneous swimming velocity; however, larger discrepancies are evident for butterfly and breaststroke.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports Biomechanics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports Biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2024.2388572","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

要想在竞技游泳中取得好成绩,游泳运动员必须最大限度地提高推进力,同时最大限度地降低阻力,这可以通过瞬时游泳速度来评估。目前有许多系统可以量化速度,因此了解不同系统之间的一致性非常重要。本研究考察了基于视频的自动系统和系绳系统测量瞬时速度的一致性。22 名竞技游泳运动员(州级或州级以上)以最大强度完成了每种划水动作 25 米。系绳速度计系在游泳者的腰部,同时记录每次试验的视频。然后使用专有软件自动跟踪游泳者的头部,并根据每个系统确定瞬时速度。Bland-Altman 图显示,两种系统在仰泳(95% 一致度 (LOA):-0.24-0.26 m.s-1)和自由泳(95% 一致度 (LOA):-0.36-0.38 m.s-1)中的一致性较好,但在蝶泳(95% 一致度 (LOA):-0.51-0.53 m.s-1)和蛙泳(95% 一致度 (LOA):-0.88-0.92 m.s-1)中的一致性较差。蝶泳(0.27 m.s-1)和蛙泳(0.46 m.s-1)的均方根误差高于仰泳(0.13 m.s-1)和自由泳(0.19 m.s-1)。结果表明,在测量瞬时游泳速度方面,两种系统具有可比性;但在测量蝶泳和蛙泳时,差异较大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Agreement between an automated video-based system and tethered system to measure instantaneous swimming velocity.

Successful performance in competitive swimming requires a swimmer to maximise propulsion and minimise drag, which can be assessed using instantaneous swimming velocity. Many systems exist to quantify velocity, and therefore, it is important to understand the agreement between systems. This study examined the agreement between an automated video-based system and a tethered system to measure instantaneous velocity. Twenty-two competitive swimmers (state level or higher) completed 25 m of each stroke at maximal intensity. The tethered speedometer was attached to the swimmer's waist, while videos of each trial were recorded. The swimmer's head was then automatically tracked using proprietary software, and instantaneous velocity was determined from each system. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between the two systems in backstroke (95% Limits of Agreement (LOA): -0.24-0.26 m.s-1) and freestyle (95% LOA: -0.36-0.38 m.s-1) but poorer agreement in butterfly (95% LOA: -0.51-0.53 m.s-1) and breaststroke (95% LOA: -0.88-0.92 m.s-1). The root mean square error was higher in butterfly (0.27 m.s-1) and breaststroke (0.46 m.s-1) compared to backstroke (0.13 m.s-1) and freestyle (0.19 m.s-1). Results demonstrated that the two systems are comparable for measuring instantaneous swimming velocity; however, larger discrepancies are evident for butterfly and breaststroke.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sports Biomechanics
Sports Biomechanics 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
135
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Sports Biomechanics is the Thomson Reuters listed scientific journal of the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports (ISBS). The journal sets out to generate knowledge to improve human performance and reduce the incidence of injury, and to communicate this knowledge to scientists, coaches, clinicians, teachers, and participants. The target performance realms include not only the conventional areas of sports and exercise, but also fundamental motor skills and other highly specialized human movements such as dance (both sport and artistic). Sports Biomechanics is unique in its emphasis on a broad biomechanical spectrum of human performance including, but not limited to, technique, skill acquisition, training, strength and conditioning, exercise, coaching, teaching, equipment, modeling and simulation, measurement, and injury prevention and rehabilitation. As well as maintaining scientific rigour, there is a strong editorial emphasis on ''reader friendliness''. By emphasising the practical implications and applications of research, the journal seeks to benefit practitioners directly. Sports Biomechanics publishes papers in four sections: Original Research, Reviews, Teaching, and Methods and Theoretical Perspectives.
×
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