Dataset Information

Test-retest reliability of the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This review aimed to synthesize previous findings on the test-retest reliability of the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test (IFT).

Methods

The literature searches were performed in 8 databases. Studies that examined the test-retest reliability of the 30-15 IFT and presented the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and/or the coefficient of variation (CV) for maximal velocity and/or peak heart rate were included. The consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist was used for the assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies.

Results

Seven studies, with a total of 10 study groups, explored reliability of maximal velocity assessed by the 30-15 IFT. ICCs ranged from 0.80 to 0.99, where 70% of ICCs were ≥0.90. CVs for maximal velocity ranged from 1.5% to 6.0%. Six studies, with a total of 7 study groups, explored reliability of peak heart rate as assessed by the 30-15 IFT. ICCs ranged from 0.90 to 0.97 (i.e., all ICCs were ≥0.90). CVs ranged from 0.6% to 4.8%. All included studies were of excellent methodological quality.

Conclusion

From the results of this systematic review, it can be concluded that the 30-15 IFT has excellent test-retest reliability for both maximal velocity and peak heart rate. The test may, therefore, be used as a reliable measure of fitness in research and sports practice.

SUBMITTER: Grgic J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8343059 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) testing is routinely performed by most armed and tactical forces around the world as part of their recruitment process for new members or simply as an annual examination of their personnel. A 2-mile run (2MR) test is among the most commonly used. However, as it is performed outdoors, weather, climate, and terrain can influence the results and often limit the maximum performance. Also, this test has been shown to be difficult for individuals because the pacing strategy is self-paced. As such, it does not reflect the real situation on the battlefield, where most activities are externally driven by the environment and the enemy. Therefore, we believe that the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test (30-15IFT) may be a suitable tool for measuring CRF and battle readiness of military personnel. Moreover, given the importance of visual attention to military personnel we aim to investigate the differences in visual attention between better and less physically prepared infantry members and its corresponding response to maximal endurance running test.Methods and analysisThis randomized cross-over study using a within-subjects test-retest design will enroll 32 infantry members of the Slovenian Armed Forces. To investigate the reliability and validity of the 30-15IFT test, an incremental treadmill test (TR), a 2MR test, and two identical 30-15IFT will be performed in randomized order. Additionally, participants will be subsequently divided into two groups based on their score on the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT), whereas differences in visual attention will be assessed by using the d2 test. The primary analysis will assess differences in key physiological outcomes between the different CRF tests (TR vs. 2MR vs. 30-15IFT). In addition, the relative reliability of all dependent variables between two 30-15IFT trials will be estimated by interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), while relationship between maximal oxygen uptake, heart rate and maximal running speed of 30-15IFT, TR and 2MR will be assessed using Pearson's correlation.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the National Medical Ethics Committee (reference number: 0120-495/2021/6). The results of the proposed study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals.Clinical trial registration[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT05218798].

Project description:BACKGROUND:Once considered mere noise, fMRI-based functional connectivity has become a major neuroscience tool in part due to early studies demonstrating its reliability. These fundamental studies revealed only the tip of the iceberg; over the past decade, many test-retest reliability studies have continued to add nuance to our understanding of this complex topic. A summary of these diverse and at times contradictory perspectives is needed. OBJECTIVES:We aimed to summarize the existing knowledge regarding test-retest reliability of functional connectivity at the most basic unit of analysis: the individual edge level. This entailed (1) a meta-analytic estimate of reliability and (2) a review of factors influencing reliability. METHODS:A search of Scopus was conducted to identify studies that estimated edge-level test-retest reliability. To facilitate comparisons across studies, eligibility was restricted to studies measuring reliability via the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The meta-analysis included a random effects pooled estimate of mean edge-level ICC, with studies nested within datasets. The review included a narrative summary of factors influencing edge-level ICC. RESULTS:From an initial pool of 212 studies, 44 studies were identified for the qualitative review and 25 studies for quantitative meta-analysis. On average, individual edges exhibited a "poor" ICC of 0.29 (95% CI?=?0.23 to 0.36). The most reliable measurements tended to involve: (1) stronger, within-network, cortical edges, (2) eyes open, awake, and active recordings, (3) more within-subject data, (4) shorter test-retest intervals, (5) no artifact correction (likely due in part to reliable artifact), and (6) full correlation-based connectivity with shrinkage. CONCLUSION:This study represents the first meta-analysis and systematic review investigating test-retest reliability of edge-level functional connectivity. Key findings suggest there is room for improvement, but care should be taken to avoid promoting reliability at the expense of validity. By pooling existing knowledge regarding this key facet of accuracy, this study supports broader efforts to improve inferences in the field.

Project description:BackgroundNeurocognitive testing is an important concussion evaluation tool, but for neurocognitive tests to be useful, their psychometric properties must be well established. Test-retest reliability of computerized neurocognitive tests can influence their clinical utility. The reliability for a commonly used computerized neurocognitive test, CNS Vital Signs, is not well established. The purpose of this study was to examine test-retest reliability and reliable change indices for CNS Vital Signs in a healthy, physically active college population.HypothesisCNS Vital Signs yields acceptable test-retest reliability, with greater reliability between the second and third test administration compared with between the first and second administration.Study designCohort study.Level of evidenceLevel 3.MethodsForty healthy, active volunteers (16 men, 24 women; mean age, 21.05 ± 2.17 years) reported to a clinical laboratory for 3 sessions, 1 week apart. At each session, participants were administered CNS Vital Signs. Outcomes included standard scores for the following CNS Vital Signs domains: verbal memory, visual memory, psychomotor speed, cognitive flexibility, complex attention, processing speed, reaction time, executive functioning, and reasoning.ResultsParticipants performed significantly better on the second session and/or third session than they did on the first testing session on 6 of 9 neurocognitive domains. Pearson r test-retest correlations between sessions ranged from 0.11 to 0.87. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.10 to 0.86.ConclusionClinicians should consider using reliable change indices to account for practice effects, identify meaningful score changes due to pathology, and inform clinical decisions.Clinical relevanceThis study highlights the importance of clinicians understanding the psychometric properties of computerized neurocognitive tests when using them in the management of sport-related concussion. If CNS Vital Signs is administered twice within a small time frame (such as 1 week), athletes should be expected to improve between the first and second administration.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is currently known about the tapering practices of strongman athletes. We have developed an Internet-based comprehensive self-report questionnaire examining the training and tapering practices of strongman athletes.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to document the test-retest reliability of questions associated with the Internet-based comprehensive self-report questionnaire on the tapering practices of strongman athletes. The information will provide insight on the reliability and usefulness of the online questionnaire for use with strongman athletes.MethodsInvitations to complete an Internet questionnaire were sent via Facebook Messenger to identified strongman athletes. The survey consisted of four main areas of inquiry, including demographics and background information, training practices, tapering, and tapering practices. Of the 454 athletes that completed the survey over the 8-week period, 130 athletes responded on Facebook Messenger indicating that they intended to complete, or had completed, the survey. These participants were asked if they could complete the online questionnaire a second time for a test-retest reliability analysis. Sixty-four athletes (mean age 33.3 years, standard deviation [SD] 7.7; mean height 178.2 cm, SD 11.0; mean body mass 103.7 kg, SD 24.8) accepted this invitation and completed the survey for the second time after a minimum 7-day period from the date of their first completion. Agreement between athlete responses was measured using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and kappa statistics. Confidence intervals (at 95%) were reported for all measures and significance was set at P<.05.ResultsTest-retest reliability for demographic and training practices items were significant (P<.001) and showed excellent (ICC range=.84 to .98) and fair to almost perfect agreement (? range=.37-.85). Moderate to excellent agreements (ICC range=.56-.84; P<.01) were observed for all tapering practice measures except for the number of days athletes started their usual taper before a strongman competition (ICC=.30). When the number of days were categorized with additional analyses, moderate reliability was observed (?=.43; P<.001). Fair to substantial agreement was observed for the majority of tapering practices measures (?range=.38-.73; P<.001) except for how training frequency (?=.26) and the percentage and type of resistance training performed, which changed in the taper (?=.20). Good to excellent agreement (ICC=.62-.93; P<.05) was observed for items relating to strongman events and traditional exercises performed during the taper. Only the time at which the Farmer's Walk was last performed before competition showed poor reliability (ICC=.27).ConclusionsWe have developed a low cost, self-reported, online retrospective questionnaire, which provided stable and reliable answers for most of the demographic, training, and tapering practice questions. The results of this study support the inferences drawn from the Tapering Practices of Strongman Athletes Study.