scholarly journals Using Unilateral Strength, Power and Reactive Strength Tests to Detect the Magnitude and Direction of Asymmetry: A Test-Retest Design

Sports ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Bishop ◽  
Paul Read ◽  
Shyam Chavda ◽  
Paul Jarvis ◽  
Anthony Turner
Keyword(s):  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Systematic Bias ◽  
Paired Samples ◽  
Strength Tests ◽  
Limb Asymmetry ◽  
Healthy Athlete ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

The aims of the present study were to determine test-retest reliability for unilateral strength and power tests used to quantify asymmetry and determine the consistency of both the magnitude and direction of asymmetry between test sessions. Twenty-eight recreational trained sport athletes performed unilateral isometric squat, countermovement jump (CMJ) and drop jump (DJ) tests over two test sessions. Inter-limb asymmetry was calculated from both the best trial and as an average of three trials for each test. Test reliability was computed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV) and standard error of measurement (SEM). In addition, paired samples t-tests were used to determine systematic bias between test sessions and Kappa coefficients to report how consistently asymmetry favoured the same side. Within and between-session reliability ranged from moderate to excellent (ICC range = 0.70–0.96) and CV values ranged from 3.7–13.7% across tests. Significant differences in asymmetry between test sessions were seen for impulse during the isometric squat (p = 0.04; effect size = –0.60) but only when calculating from the best trial. When computing the direction of asymmetry across test sessions, levels of agreement were fair to substantial for the isometric squat (Kappa = 0.29–0.64), substantial for the CMJ (Kappa = 0.64–0.66) and fair to moderate for the DJ (Kappa = 0.36–0.56). These results show that when asymmetry is computed between test sessions, the group mean is generally devoid of systematic bias; however, the direction of asymmetry shows greater variability and is often inter-changeable. Thus, practitioners should consider both the direction and magnitude of asymmetry when monitoring inter-limb differences in healthy athlete populations.

Test–Retest Reliability of Skill Tests in the F-MARC Battery for Youth Soccer Players

2019 ◽  
Vol 126 (5) ◽  
pp. 1006-1023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis Padrón-Cabo ◽  
Ezequiel Rey ◽  
Alexandra Pérez-Ferreirós ◽  
Anton Kalén
Keyword(s):  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Young Male ◽  
Soccer Players ◽  
Limits Of Agreement ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Youth Soccer ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Absolute Reliability ◽  
Error Of Measurement

This study aimed to evaluate the test–retest reliability of soccer skill tests belonging to the F-MARC test battery. To avoid bias during talent identification and development, coaches and scouts should be using reliable tests for assessing soccer-specific skills in young male players. Fifty-two U-14 outfield male soccer players performed F-MARC soccer skill tests on two occasions, separated by 7 days. After familiarization, we administered two trial sessions of five skill tests: speed dribbling, juggling, shooting, passing, and heading. We assessed absolute reliability by expressing the standard error of measurement as a coefficient of variation with 95% limits of agreement, and we assessed relative reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient and with Pearson’s correlation ( r). The results demonstrated satisfactory relative and absolute reliability for speed dribbling, right foot juggling, short passing, shooting a dead ball right, shooting from a pass, heading in front, and heading right. However, reliability values for left foot juggling, chest-head-foot juggling, head-left-foot-right foot-chest-head juggling, long pass, and shooting a dead ball left tests were not strong enough to suggest their usage by coaches in training or sport scientists in research.

WITHIN-DAY AND BETWEEN-DAY RELIABILITY OF A FBG-BASED SMART SOCK SYSTEM FOR MEASURING ACTIVE TOE FLEXION DISPLACEMENT OF THE HALLUX

2021 ◽  
pp. 2150057
Author(s):  
PUI WAH KONG ◽  
JING WEN PAN ◽  
DANIEL T. P. FONG ◽  
YIXUAN LEOW ◽  
YIMIN LIU ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wearable Sensors ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Repeated Measurements ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Paired Samples ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
And Control ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Prototype Design

This study examined the test-retest reliability of hallux flexion displacement measured using a smart sock system with embedded fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors. Thirty female participants consisting of 15 hallux valgus (HV) patients and 15 control participants were recruited. Maximum active hallux flexion displacement was measured twice on each participant in the first visit; the same procedures were repeated 7 days later. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were applied to test within-day and between-day reliability. Paired-samples T-test was performed to compare the displacements between trials. Results showed almost perfect within-day reliability for both HV and control groups ([Formula: see text] and 0.977, respectively) with small SEM (both 0.5[Formula: see text]cm). However, fair to moderate between-day reliability was found (0.323 and 0.438, respectively). Significant differences were found between repeated measurements taken on the same day (mean [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]cm, [Formula: see text]) and on different days (mean [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]cm, [Formula: see text]), though the effect size was small. The poorer between-day reliability is likely due to the inconsistency in fitting the sock onto the foot. Future optimization of the prototype design is called for to improve the fitting consistency of wearable sensors onto patients.

scholarly journals The Isometric Horizontal Push Test: Test–Retest Reliability and Validation Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Dello Iacono ◽  
Stephanie Valentin ◽  
Mark Sanderson ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Strain Gauge ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Force Plate ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Peak Force ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

Purpose: To investigate the test–retest reliability and criterion validity of the isometric horizontal push test (IHPT), a newly designed test that selectively measures the horizontal component of maximal isometric force. Methods: Twenty-four active males with ≥3 years of resistance training experience performed 2 testing sessions of the IHPT, separated by 3 to 4 days of rest. In each session, subjects performed 3 maximal trials of the IHPT with 3 minutes of rest between them. The peak force outputs were collected simultaneously using a strain gauge and the criterion equipment consisting of a floor-embedded force plate. Results: The test–retest reliability of peak force values was nearly perfect (intraclass correlation coefficient = ∼.99). Bland–Altman analysis showed excellent agreement between days with nearly no bias for strain gauge 1.2 N (95% confidence interval [CI], −3 to 6 N) and force plate 0.8 N (95% CI, −4 to 6 N). A nearly perfect correlation was observed between the strain gauge and force plate (r = .98, P < .001), with a small bias of 8 N (95% CI, 1.2 to 15 N) in favor of the force plate. The sensitivity of the IHPT was also good, with smallest worthwhile change greater than standard error of measurement for both the strain gauge (smallest worthwhile change: 29 N; standard error of measurement: 17 N; 95% CI, 14 to 20 N) and the force plate (smallest worthwhile change: 29 N; standard error of measurement: 18 N; 95% CI, 14 to 19 N) devices. Conclusions: The high degree of validity, reliability, and sensitivity of the IHPT, coupled with its affordability, portability, ease of use, and time efficacy, point to the potential of the test for assessment and monitoring purposes.

scholarly journals Test–Retest Reliability of Functional Electromechanical Dynamometer on Five Sit-to-Stand Measures in Healthy Young Adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (13) ◽  
pp. 6829
Author(s):  
Daniel Jerez-Mayorga ◽  
Álvaro Huerta-Ojeda ◽  
Luis Javier Chirosa-Ríos ◽  
Francisco Guede-Rojas ◽  
Iris Paola Guzmán-Guzmán ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Peak Velocity ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Peak Strength ◽  
Movement Velocity ◽  
Sit To Stand ◽  
Reliable Instrument ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability for the strength and movement velocity of the concentric phase from the five Sit-to-Stand (5STS), using three incremental loads measured by a functional electromechanical dynamometer (FEMD) in healthy young adults. Methods: The average and peak strength and velocity values of sixteen healthy adults (mean ± standard deviation (SD): age = 22.81 ± 2.13 years) were recorded at 5, 10 and 15 kg. To evaluate the reliability of FEMD, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and coefficient of variation (CV) were obtained. Results: Reliability was high for the 10 kg (CV range: 3.70–4.18%, ICC range: 0.95–0.98) and 15 kg conditions (CV range: 1.64–3.02%, ICC: 0.99) at average and peak strength, and reliability was high for the 5 kg (CV range: 1.71–2.84%, ICC range: 0.96–0.99), 10 kg (CV range: 0.74–1.84%, ICC range: 0.99–1.00) and 15 kg conditions (CV range: 0.79–3.11%, ICC range: 0.99–1.00) at average and peak velocity. Conclusions: The findings of this study demonstrate that FEMD is a reliable instrument to measure the average and peak strength and velocity values during the five STS in healthy young adults.

Reliability of the Active-Knee-Extension and Straight-Leg-Raise Tests in Subjects With Flexibility Deficits

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiago Neto ◽  
Lia Jacobsohn ◽  
Ana I. Carita ◽  
Raul Oliveira
Keyword(s):  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Straight Leg Raise ◽  
Academic Laboratory ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

Context: The active-knee-extension test (AKE) and the straight-leg-raise test (SLR) are widely used for flexibility assessment. A number of investigations have tested the reliability of these measures, especially the AKE. However, in most studies, the sample involved subjects with normal flexibility. In addition, few studies have determined the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable difference (MDD), which can provide complementary and more clinically relevant information than the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) alone. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the AKE and LSR intrarater (test-retest) reliability in subjects with flexibility deficits, as well as the correlation between the 2 tests. Design: Reliability study. Setting: Academic laboratory. Subjects: 102 recreationally active participants (48 male, 54 female) with no injury to the lower limbs and with flexibility deficits in the hamstrings muscle group. Main Outcomes: Intrarater reliability was determined using the ICC, complemented by the SEM and MDD. Measures: All participants performed, in each lower limb, 2 trials of the AKE and the SLR. Results: The ICC values found for AKE and SLR tests were, respectively, .87-.94 and .93-.97. The values for SEM were low for both tests (2.6-2.9° for AKE, 2.2-2.6° for SLR), as well as the calculated MDD (7-8° for AKE, 6-7° for SLR). A moderate to strong, and significant, correlation between AKE and SLR was determined for the dominant limb (r = .71) and the nondominant limb (r = .67). Conclusions: These findings suggest that both AKE and SLR have excellent intrarater reliability. The SEMs and MDDs recorded are also very encouraging for the use of these tests in subjects with flexibility deficits.

scholarly journals Test–Retest Reliability of the Total Motion Release® Scale

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Emilie N. Miley ◽  
Ashley J. Reeves ◽  
Madeline P. Casanova ◽  
Nickolai J.P. Martonick ◽  
Jayme Baker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
The Body ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

Context: Total Motion Release® (TMR®) is a novel treatment paradigm used to restore asymmetries in the body (eg, pain, tightness, limited range of motion). Six primary movements, known as the Fab 6, are performed by the patient and scored using a 0 to 100 scale. Clinicians currently utilize the TMR® scale to modify treatment, assess patient progress, and measure treatment effectiveness; however, the reliability of the TMR® scale has not been determined. It is imperative to assess scale reliability and establish minimal detectable change (MDC) values to guide clinical practice. Objective: To assess the reliability of the TMR® scale and establish MDC values for each motion in healthy individuals in a group setting. Design: Retrospective analysis of group TMR® assessments. Setting: University classroom. Participants: A convenience sample of 61 students (23 males and 38 females; 25.48 [5.73] y), with (n = 31) and without (n = 30) previous exposure to TMR®. Intervention: The TMR® Fab 6 movements were tested at 2 time points, 2 hours apart. A clinician with previous training in TMR® led participant groups through both sessions while participants recorded individual motion scores using the 0 to 100 TMR® scale. Test–retest reliability was calculated using an intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) for inexperienced, experienced, and combined student groups. Standard error of measurement and MDC values were also assessed for each intraclass correlation coefficient. Outcome Measure: Self-reported scores on the TMR® scale. Results: Test–retest reliability ranged from 0.57 to 0.95 across the Fab 6 movements, standard error of measurement values ranged from 4.85 to 11.77, and MDC values ranged from 13.45 to 32.62. Conclusion: The results indicate moderate to excellent reliability across the Fab 6 movements and a range of MDC values. Although this study is the first step in assessing the reliability of the TMR® scale for clinical practice, caution is warranted until further research is completed to establish reliability and MDC values of the TMR® scale in various settings to better guide patient care.

scholarly journals Test-retest reliability of a smartphone app for measuring core stability for two dynamic exercises

PeerJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. e7485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paloma Guillén-Rogel ◽  
Cristina Franco-Escudero ◽  
Pedro J. Marín
Keyword(s):  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Dynamic Exercise ◽  
Core Stability ◽  
Smartphone App ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Exercise Tests ◽  
Minimum Detectable Difference ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

Background Recently, there has been growing interest in using smartphone applications to assess gait speed and quantify isometric core stability exercise intensity. The purpose of this study was to investigate the between-session reliability and minimal detectable change of a smartphone app for two dynamic exercise tests of the lumbopelvic complex. Methods Thirty-three healthy young and active students (age: 22.3 ± 5.9 years, body weight: 66.9 ± 11.3 kg, height: 167.8 ± 10.3 cm) participated in this study. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (%CV), and Bland–Altman plots were used to verify the reliability of the test. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the minimum detectable difference (MDD) were calculated for clinical applicability. Results The ICCs ranged from 0.73 to 0.96, with low variation (0.9% to 4.8%) between days of assessments. The Bland–Altman plots and one-sample t-tests (p > 0.05) indicated that no dynamic exercise tests changed systematically. Our analyses showed that SEM 0.6 to 1.5 mm/s-2) and MDD (2.1 to 3.5 mm/s-2). Conclusion The OCTOcore app is a reliable tool to assess core stability for two dynamic exercises. A minimal change of 3.5 mm/s-2 is needed to be confident that the change is not a measurement error between two sessions.

Development and preliminary validation of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire for Clinicians

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 673-682
Author(s):  
Martin Rabey ◽  
Mark Catley ◽  
Kevin Vowles ◽  
Damien Appleton ◽  
Richard Bennett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Rasch Analysis ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Good Reliability ◽  
Pain Acceptance ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
Error Of Measurement

AbstractBackground and AimsHigher chronic pain acceptance is associated with lower pain and disability. Clinician beliefs are associated with patients’ beliefs. This study therefore aimed to develop the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire for Clinicians (CPAQ-C) to measure clinicians’ beliefs regarding the importance of levels of acceptance in patients with chronic pain, and to examine the questionnaire’s psychometric properties.MethodsPhase one: the CPAQ-C was adapted from the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire. Data on 162 completed questionnaires were analysed using Rasch analysis. Phase Two: the cohort completed the Healthcare Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale, and the association (Pearson’s correlation co-efficient) between these questionnaires examined to assist CPAQ-C validation. Twenty-four participants completed the CPAQ-C one-week later. Test re-test reliability was examined using intraclass correlation co-efficient (2,1) and standard error of measurement. Phase Three: to examine responsiveness 17 clinicians attending a workshop on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy completed the CPAQ-C before and immediately after the workshop, and six-months later. The Skillings Mack test was used to determine whether CPAQ-C scores differed across different timepoints.ResultsRasch analysis supported two subscales: activity engagement and pain willingness. Five poorly functioning items were excluded. There was good correlation between the CPAQ-C and Healthcare Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (-.54). The CPAQ-C demonstrated good reliability (ICC (2,1): .81; standard error of measurement: 4.76). There was significant improvement in CPAQ-C scores following the workshop (p=<.001).ConclusionsThe CPAQ-C appears a valid, reliable and responsive measure of clinicians’ beliefs regarding the importance of levels of acceptance in patients with chronic pain.ImplicationsWhere the CPAQ-C reveals that clinicians have low perceived levels of importance regarding acceptance in patients with chronic pain those clinicians may benefit from specific education, however, this requires further examination.

The Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test: Reliability, Validity and Reference Values Studies with Healthy Elderly People

1997 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 270-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanne Desrosiers ◽  
Annie Rochette ◽  
Réjean Hébert ◽  
Gina Bravo
Keyword(s):  
Elderly People ◽  
Reference Values ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Manual Dexterity ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Healthy Elderly ◽  
Block Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Several dexterity tests have been developed, including the Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test (MRMT) and a new version, the Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test (MMDT). The objectives of the study were: a) to verify the test-retest reliability of the MMDT; b) to compare the MRMT and the MMDT; c) to study the concurrent validity of the MMDT; and d) to establish reference values for elderly people with the MMDT. Two hundred and forty-seven community-living healthy elderly were evaluated with the MMDT, and two other dexterity tests, the Box and Block Test (BBT) and the Purdue Pegboard (PP). Thirty-five of them were evaluated twice with the MMDT and 44 were evaluated with both the MMDT and MRMT. The results show that the test-retest reliability of the MMDT is acceptable to high (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.79 to 0.87, depending on the subtest) and the validity of the test is demonstrated by significant correlations between the MMDT, the BBT and the PP (0.63 to 0.67). There is a high correlation (0.85 to 0.95) between the MMDT and the MMRT in spite of different results. The reference values will help occupational therapists to differentiate better between real dexterity difficulties and those that may be attributed to normal aging.

Interpretation of the Standard Error of Measurement when True Scores and Error Scores on Mental Tests are Not Independent

1966 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 611-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald W. Zimmerman ◽  
Richard H. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Test Score ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
True Score ◽  
Observed Score ◽  
Standard Error Of Measurement ◽  
True Scores ◽  
Modified Equation ◽  
Error Of Measurement

It is shown that for the case of non-independence of true scores and error scores interpretation of the standard error of measurement is modified in two ways. First, the standard deviation of the distribution of error scores is given by a modified equation. Second, the confidence interval for true score varies with the individual's observed score. It is shown that the equation, so=√[(N−O/a]+[so2(roō−roo)/roō]̄, where N is the number of items, O is the individual's observed score, a is the number of choices per item, so2 is observed variance, roo is test reliability as empirically determined, and roō is reliability for the case where only non-independent error is present, provides a more accurate interpretation of the test score of an individual.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document