Dataset Information

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses.

ABSTRACT: Main aim of this study was examining validity and reliability of using a new specific Parkour repeated sprint ability test (SPRSA) for assessing repeated sprint ability while facing obstacles and establishing between-day reliability and sensitivity of SPRSA related to its physiological and performance responses. Thirteen high-level traceurs (three females) performed in random order and twice eight tests for assessing a total of 23 variables: SPRSA (a typical maximal-speed shuttle run interspersed with four Parkour competition-common fundamentals) and seven established fitness tests, core stability, hand-grip, vertical-jump, long-jump, pull-up, 300-m shuttle run (as a field test for anaerobic capacity), and Leger test. Except for muscular elasticity index of vertical jump test (intra-class Correlation Coefficient model 3,1 [ICC₃,₁] = 0.54 [fair]), fitness tests' ICC₃,₁s resulted excellent (ICC₃,₁: 0.93-1.00). SPRSA total time and time of its fastest sprint (SPRSA peak time) were significantly correlated with the majority of core stability (r: -0.79 to 0.59; P < 0.01-0.05), jumping (r: -0.78 to 0.67; P < 0.01-0.05), pull-up tests (r: -0.86; P < 0.01), 300-m shuttle run test total time (r: 0.77-0.82; P < 0.01), and Leger test-estimated VO₂ max (r: -0.78; P < 0.01). Principal component analysis (PCA) of the 23 variables led to extraction of four significant components (each due to different variables' combinations), which explained 90.2% of 23 variables' total variance. SPRSA (i.e., total and peak time) showed high reliability (ICC₃,₁: 0.991-0.998 and standard-error-of-measurement %: 0.07-0.32). Finally, SPRSA showed high sensitivity (smallest-worthwhile-change %: 0.29-0.68). Considering its excellent logical and strong ecological validity, SPRSA may serve as a valid specific field test for Parkour sport. In addition, thanks to its high reliability and sensitivity, this test is suitable for monitoring, evaluating, and programming training processes for Parkour practitioners in repeated sprint ability involving crossing obstacles.

SUBMITTER: Padulo J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6831735 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses.

Padulo Johnny J Ardigò Luca Paolo LP Bianco Massimo M Cular Drazen D Madic Dejan D Markoski Branko B Dhahbi Wissem W

Frontiers in physiology 20191030

Main aim of this study was examining validity and reliability of using a new specific Parkour repeated sprint ability test (SPRSA) for assessing repeated sprint ability while facing obstacles and establishing between-day reliability and sensitivity of SPRSA related to its physiological and performance responses. Thirteen high-level traceurs (three females) performed in random order and twice eight tests for assessing a total of 23 variables: SPRSA (a typical maximal-speed shuttle run intersperse ...[more]

PMID: 31736783

Similar Datasets

Project description:The purpose of this study was to examine the test-retest reliability, and convergent and discriminative validity of a new taekwondo-specific change-of-direction (COD) speed test with striking techniques (TST) in elite taekwondo athletes. Twenty (10 males and 10 females) elite (athletes who compete at national level) and top-elite (athletes who compete at national and international level) taekwondo athletes with an average training background of 8.9 ± 1.3 years of systematic taekwondo training participated in this study. During the two-week test-retest period, various generic performance tests measuring COD speed, balance, speed, and jump performance were carried out during the first week and as a retest during the second week. Three TST trials were conducted with each athlete and the best trial was used for further analyses. The relevant performance measure derived from the TST was the time with striking penalty (TST-TSP). TST-TSP performances amounted to 10.57 ± 1.08 s for males and 11.74 ± 1.34 s for females. The reliability analysis of the TST performance was conducted after logarithmic transformation, in order to address the problem of heteroscedasticity. In both groups, the TST demonstrated a high relative test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients and 90% compatibility limits were 0.80 and 0.47 to 0.93, respectively). For absolute reliability, the TST's typical error of measurement (TEM), 90% compatibility limits, and magnitudes were 4.6%, 3.4 to 7.7, for males, and 5.4%, 3.9 to 9.0, for females. The homogeneous sample of taekwondo athletes meant that the TST's TEM exceeded the usual smallest important change (SIC) with 0.2 effect size in the two groups. The new test showed mostly very large correlations with linear sprint speed (r = 0.71 to 0.85) and dynamic balance (r = -0.71 and -0.74), large correlations with COD speed (r = 0.57 to 0.60) and vertical jump performance (r = -0.50 to -0.65), and moderate correlations with horizontal jump performance (r = -0.34 to -0.45) and static balance (r = -0.39 to -0.44). Top-elite athletes showed better TST performances than elite counterparts. Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated that the TST effectively discriminated between top-elite and elite taekwondo athletes. In conclusion, the TST is a valid, and sensitive test to evaluate the COD speed with taekwondo specific skills, and reliable when considering ICC and TEM. Although the usefulness of the TST is questioned to detect small performance changes in the present population, the TST can detect moderate changes in taekwondo-specific COD speed.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the convergent validity of the six-minute stepper test (6MST) with the variables used in the diagnosis of sarcopenia (appendicular muscle mass, handgrip strength and six-meter gait speed test), as well as to evaluate test-retest reliability and safety when applied to hospitalized elderly patients. Finally, we aimed to compare the performance in the 6MST between hospitalized elderly patients and healthy elderly from the community.Materials and methodsObservational and cross-sectional study. Elderly patients admitted to a private hospital and healthy elderly from the community were recruited. On the first day, the patients included underwent the following assessments: anthropometric, handgrip strength (HGS), six-meter gait speed test (6GST) and 6MST. On the second day, before breakfast, patients underwent body composition assessment. The healthy elderly were evaluated on a single day and performed only anthropometric assessment and 6MST.Results30 hospitalized patients (age 71.0±7.9 years) and 15 healthy elderly (age 68.1±5.8 years) were included. There was a high correlation of 6MST with 6GST (r = 0.78; p<0.001), moderate correlation with HGS (r = 0.59; p<0.001) and low correlation with appendicular muscle mass (r = 0.45; p = 0.01). There was no statistical difference between the first and second 6MST performed by hospitalized elderly (196.2±91.0 cycles vs. 191.3±103.7 cycles; p = 0.66), in addition to an excellent agreement between these measures (ICC = 0.90; 95% IC 0.78-0.95). Only one adverse event (3.3%) occurred in the sample.Conclusion6MST showed convergent validity with the functional variables used in the diagnosis of sarcopenia. In addition, excellent test-retest reliability was observed, which indicates the need for a single assessment in hospitalized elderly patients. The prevalence of adverse events during the application of the test is low, without resulting in clinical symptoms; therefore, the test is considered safe for this population. In addition, hospitalized elderly patients perform worse in the 6MST compared to healthy elderly from the community.

Project description:BackgroundThe Ruff Figural Fluency Test (RFFT) is a valid but time-consuming and labour-intensive cognitive paper-and-pencil test. A digital RFFT was developed that can be conducted independently using an iPad and Apple Pencil and RFFT scores are computed automatically. We investigated the validity and reliability of this digital RFFT.MethodsWe randomly allocated participants to the digital or paper-and-pencil RFFT. After the first test, the other test was performed immediately (cross-over). Participants were invited for a second digital RFFT 1 week later. For the digital RFFT, an (automatic) algorithm and two independent raters (criterion standard) assessed the number of unique designs (UD) and perseverative errors (PE). These raters also assessed the paper-and-pencil RFFT. We used Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), sensitivity, specificity, %-agreement, Kappa, and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsWe included 94 participants (mean (SD) age 39.9 (14.8), 73.4% follow-up). Mean (SD) UD and median (IQR) PE of the digital RFFT were 84.2 (26.0) and 4 (2-7.3), respectively. Agreement between manual and automatic scoring of the digital RFFT was high for UD (ICC = 0.99, 95% CI 0.98, 0.99, sensitivity = 0.98; specificity = 0.96) and PE (ICC = 0.99, 95% CI 0.98, 0.99; sensitivity = 0.90, specificity = 1.00), indicating excellent criterion validity. Small but significant differences in UD were found between the automatic and manual scoring (mean difference: - 1.12, 95% CI - 1.92, - 0.33). Digital and paper-and-pencil RFFT had moderate agreement for UD (ICC = 0.73, 95% CI 0.34, 0.87) and poor agreement for PE (ICC = 0.47, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62). Participants had fewer UD on the digital than paper-and-pencil RFFT (mean difference: - 7.09, 95% CI - 11.80, - 2.38). The number of UD on the digital RFFT was associated with higher education (Spearman's r = 0.43, p < 0.001), and younger age (Pearson's r = - 0.36, p < 0.001), showing its ability to discriminate between different age categories and levels of education. Test-retest reliability was moderate (ICC = 0.74, 95% CI 0.61, 0.83).ConclusionsThe automatic scoring of the digital RFFT has good criterion and convergent validity. There was low agreement between the digital RFFT and paper-and-pencil RFFT and moderate test-retest reliability, which can be explained by learning effects. The digital RFFT is a valid and reliable instrument to measure executive cognitive function among the general population and is a feasible alternative to the paper-and-pencil RFFT in large-scale studies. However, its scores cannot be used interchangeably with the paper-and-pencil RFFT scores.

Dataset Information

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses.

Publications

Validity and Reliability of a New Specific Parkour Test: Physiological and Performance Responses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets