Dataset Information

Single-Item Self-Report Measures of Team-Sport Athlete Wellbeing and Their Relationship With Training Load: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Single-item athlete self-report measures consist of a single question to assess a dimension of wellbeing. These methods are recommended and frequently used for athlete monitoring, yet their uniformity has not been well assessed, and we have a limited understanding of their relationship with measures of training load.

Objective

To investigate the applications and designs of single-item self-report measures used in monitoring team-sport athletes and present the relationship between these measures and measures of training load.

Data sources

PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus were searched between inception and March 2019.

Study selection

Articles were included if they concerned adult athletes from field- or court-sport domains, if athlete well-being was measured using a single-item self-report, and if the relationship with a measure of modifiable training load was investigated over at least 7 days.

Data extraction

Data related to participant characteristics, self-report measures, training load measures, and statistical analysis and outcomes were extracted by 2 authors (C.D. and C.D.).

Data synthesis

A total of 21 studies were included in the analysis. A narrative synthesis was conducted. The measures used most frequently were muscle soreness, fatigue, sleep quality, stress, and mood. All measures presented various relationships with metrics of training load from no association to a very large association, and the associations were predominantly trivial to moderate in the studies with the largest numbers of observations. Relationships were largely negative associations.

Conclusions

The implications of this review should be considered by users in the application and clinical utility of single-item self-report measures in athlete monitoring. Great emphasis has been placed on examining the relationship between subjective and objective measures of training load. Although the relationship is still unclear, such an association may not be expected or useful. Researchers should consider the measurement properties of single-item self-report measures and seek to establish their relationship with clinically meaningful outcomes. As such, further study is required to inform practitioners on the appropriate objective application of data from single-item self-report measures.

SUBMITTER: Duignan C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7534939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ContextMost available data on athletic development training models focus on adult or professional athletes, where increasing workload capacity and performance is a primary goal. Development pathways in youth athletes generally emphasize multisport participation rather than sport specialization to optimize motor skill acquisition and to minimize injury risk. Other models emphasize the need for accumulation of sport- and skill-specific hours to develop elite-level status. Despite recommendations against sport specialization, many youth athletes still specialize and need guidance on training and competition. Medical and sport professionals also recommend progressive, gradual increases in workloads to enhance resilience to the demands of high-level competition. There is no accepted model of risk stratification and return to play for training a specialized youth athlete through periods of injury and maturation. In this review, we present individualized training models for specialized youth athletes that (1) prioritize performance for healthy, resilient youth athletes and (2) are adaptable through vulnerable maturational periods and injury.Evidence acquisitionNonsystematic review with critical appraisal of existing literature.Study designClinical review.Level of evidenceLevel 4.ResultsA number of factors must be considered when developing training programs for young athletes: (1) the effect of sport specialization on athlete development and injury, (2) biological maturation, (3) motor and coordination deficits in specialized youth athletes, and (4) workload progressions and response to load.ConclusionLoad-sensitive athletes with multiple risk factors may need medical evaluation, frequent monitoring, and a program designed to restore local tissue and sport-specific capacity. Load-naive athletes, who are often skeletally immature, will likely benefit from serial monitoring and should train and compete with caution, while load-tolerant athletes may only need occasional monitoring and progress to optimum loads.Strength of recommendation taxonomy (sort)B.

Project description:BackgroundCoach-athlete relationship (CAR), thriving and athlete engagement are important psychological variables that affect sports performance. On the basis of self-determination theory, this study constructs a mediation model to examine the influence of CAR on athlete engagement and the mediating effect of thriving between them.MethodsThis cross-sectional study involves a questionnaire survey with 287 Chinese active athletes (M = 19.63, SD = 2.53) aged 14-26 years (64.5% male, 35.5% female) from eight sports. CAR, thriving and athlete engagement were assessed using the CAR Questionnaire, the Thriving Scale, and the Athlete Engagement Questionnaire, respectively.ResultsCAR and its dimensions can significantly and positively predict athlete engagement, complementarity, commitment, and closeness, accounting for 35.1%, 34.6%, and 30.4% of the cumulative variance in dominance analysis, respectively. The direct and indirect paths show that CAR affects athlete engagement through the mediating effect of thriving. The mediating effect model has a good fit and indirect effects account for 56.9% of the total effects.ConclusionThe effect of CAR on athlete engagement reflects a practical application of interpersonal dynamics in competitive sports to a certain extent. The following suggestions can be used to improve athlete engagement. First, setting common goals, emphasizing mutual cooperation, and building trust and support, promote coaches and athletes to have a higher sense of commitment and complementarity to each other, thereby helping improve athlete engagement. Second, meeting the vitality and progress needs of athletes effectively mobilizes CAR resources to promote athlete engagement, which can be manipulated by cultivating closeness, commitment, and complementarity. Third, to ensure the athletes' sports state and mental health, the sports team should focus on the cultivation of athletes' capacities to thrive and internally form a dynamic and positive sports atmosphere in their team. In the future, we can track and compare the influence of the improvement of CAR on thriving and athlete engagement can be tracked and compared from the dual perspectives of coaches and athletes.

Project description:The hematological module of the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) is used in elite sport for antidoping purposes. Its aim is to better target athletes for testing and to indirectly detect blood doping. The ABP allows to monitor hematological variations in athletes using selected primary blood biomarkers [hemoglobin concentration (Hb) and reticulocyte percentage (Ret%)] with an adaptive Bayesian model to set individual upper and lower limits. If values fall outside the individual limits, an athlete may be further targeted and ultimately sanctioned. Since (Hb) varies with plasma volume (PV) fluctuations, possibly caused by training load changes, we investigated the putative influence of acute and chronic training load changes on the ABP variables. Monthly blood samples were collected over one year in 10 male elite cyclists (25.6 ± 3.4 years, 181 ± 4 cm, 71.3 ± 4.9 kg, 6.7 ± 0.8 W.kg-1 5-min maximal power output) to calculate individual ABP profiles and monitor hematological variables. Total hemoglobin mass (Hbmass) and PV were additionally measured by carbon monoxide rebreathing. Acute and chronic training loads-respectively 5 and 42 days before sampling-were calculated considering duration and intensity (training stress score, TSSTM). (Hb) averaged 14.2 ± 0.0 (mean ± SD) g.dL-1 (range: 13.3-15.5 g·dl-1) over the study with significant changes over time (P = 0.004). Hbmass was 1030 ± 87 g (range: 842-1116 g) with no significant variations over time (P = 0.118), whereas PV was 4309 ± 350 mL (range: 3,688-4,751 mL) with a time-effect observed over the study time (P = 0.014). Higher acute-but not chronic-training loads were associated with significantly decreased (Hb) (P <0.001). Although individual hematological variations were observed, all ABP variables remained within the individually calculated limits. Our results support that acute training load variations significantly affect (Hb), likely due to short-term PV fluctuations, underlining the importance of considering training load when interpreting individual ABP variations for anti-doping purposes.