TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY, CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY, AND MINIMAL DETECTABLE CHANGE OF SCORE ON AN ABBREVIATED WINGATE TEST FOR FIELD SPORT PARTICIPANTS

被引:25
作者
Hachana, Younes [1 ,2 ]
Attia, Ahmed [1 ,2 ]
Nassib, Sabri [2 ]
Shephard, Roy J. [3 ]
Chelly, Mohamed Souhaiel [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manouba, Res Unit Evaluat & Anal Factors Influencing Sport, Higher Inst Sport & Phys Educ Ksar Said, Tunis, Tunisia
[2] Higher Inst Sport & Phys Educ Ksar Said, Dept Biol Sci Appl Phys Activ & Sport, Tunis, Tunisia
[3] Univ Toronto, Fac Phys Educ & Hlth, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
maximal power; leg power; working capacity; cycle ergometer; relative reliability; absolute reliability; criterion validity; ANAEROBIC TEST; SPRINT PERFORMANCE; STATISTICAL-METHODS; ASSESSING AGREEMENT; MEASUREMENT ERROR; POWER; MEDICINE; PLAYERS; PREDICTION; CAPACITY;
D O I
10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182305485
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Hachana, Y, Attia, A, Nassib, S, Shephard, RJ, and Chelly, MS. Test-retest reliability, criterion-related validity, and minimal detectable change of score on an abbreviated Wingate test for field sport participants. J Strength Cond Res 26(5): 1324-1330, 2012-Repeat measurements in 69 young adults were performed to assess the test-retest reliability and the 95% confidence interval of the difference in score between paired observations (MDC95) of a Wingate test as abbreviated for field sport participants (test of a 15-second duration [15-secT]). Test-retest reliability was excellent for peak power output (PPO) and mean power output (MPO), independently of their mode of expression and was moderate for the fatigue index (FI). The standard errors of measurement (SEM) for absolute, relative, and derived PPO and MPO values ranged from 2.6 to 3.7%, all being smaller than the corresponding smallest worthwhile change (SWC). In contrast, FI values were rated as "marginal,'' with an SEM (9.6%) greater than the SWC (1.7). The range of MDC95 values for PPO and MPO were 9.9-10.4 and 7.37-7.42%, respectively. The absolute MPO showed the highest test-retest reliability and was the most effective in detecting real change. A second phase of the study evaluated the criterion-related validity of the 15-secT in 43 young men who performed 15-secT and standard 30-second Wingate anaerobic test (30-secT) in random order, on 2 separate occasions. There were no significant intertest differences in absolute, relative, or derived PPO. However, the FI for the 30-secT was greater than that for the 15-secT. Intertest correlations were highly significant for both MPOs and FIs. These findings suggest that the abbreviated Wingate test offers a reliable and valid tool for the evaluation of PPO and MPO, at least in young physical education students.
引用
收藏
页码:1324 / 1330
页数:7
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
Andersen K.L, 1971, FUNDAMENTALS EXERCIS
[2]   Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine [J].
Atkinson, G ;
Nevill, AM .
SPORTS MEDICINE, 1998, 26 (04) :217-238
[3]  
BAR-OR O, 1992, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, V24, pS22
[4]  
BAROR O, 1977, ISRAEL J MED SCI, V13, P326
[5]   THE WINGATE ANAEROBIC TEST - AN UPDATE ON METHODOLOGY, RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY [J].
BAROR, O .
SPORTS MEDICINE, 1987, 4 (06) :381-394
[6]   Smallest real difference, a link between reproducibility and responsiveness [J].
Beckerman, H ;
Roebroeck, ME ;
Lankhorst, GJ ;
Becher, JG ;
Bezemer, PD ;
Verbeek, ALM .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2001, 10 (07) :571-578
[7]   TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY AND MINIMAL DETECTABLE CHANGE OF THE HEXAGON AGILITY Test [J].
Beekhuizen, Kristina S. ;
Davis, Maurice D. ;
Kolber, Morey J. ;
Cheng, Ming-Shun S. .
JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2009, 23 (07) :2167-2171
[8]   How anaerobic is the Wingate Anaerobic Test for humans? [J].
Beneke, R ;
Pollmann, C ;
Bleif, I ;
Leithäuser, RM ;
Hütler, M .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY, 2002, 87 (4-5) :388-392
[9]   COMPARING 2 METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT - A PERSONAL HISTORY [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1995, 24 :S7-S14
[10]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310