在职业足球运动员现场筛查中使用着陆误差计分系统 (LESS) 时,比较不同经验水平的评分员之间和评分员内部的信度

IF 2.2 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Sports Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.3390/sports12090242
Nikolaos I. Liveris, Charis Tsarbou, Sofia A. Xergia, Angelos Papadopoulos, Elias Tsepis
{"title":"在职业足球运动员现场筛查中使用着陆误差计分系统 (LESS) 时,比较不同经验水平的评分员之间和评分员内部的信度","authors":"Nikolaos I. Liveris, Charis Tsarbou, Sofia A. Xergia, Angelos Papadopoulos, Elias Tsepis","doi":"10.3390/sports12090242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is essential for physical sports therapists to use reliable field-based tests to identify potential injury risk factors in athletes. The purpose of this study was to compare the inter- and intra-rater reliability of experienced and novice raters during use of the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) in a field-based examination of professional football athletes. Thirty-seven male football athletes underwent pre-season LESS assessment. Two raters independently evaluated the recorded landing techniques at two separate intervals, two months apart, following the LESS standard protocol. Inter-and intra-rater values were calculated for the LESS total scores and individual scoring items. The overall LESS scores had excellent intra-rater reliability values for both the experienced (interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.89–0.97; p < 0.001) and novice rater (ICC = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.90–0.97; p < 0.001), and very good to excellent inter-rater values for the first (ICC = 0.90, 95% CI, 0.77–0.95; p < 0.001) and second (ICC = 0.86, 95% CI, 0.71–0.93; p < 0.001) evaluation. Most of the individual scoring items ranged from moderate to perfect agreement. In conclusion, sports physical therapists, regardless of experience, can reliably use the LESS’s total score, through video analysis of the regime. Individual scoring items can inform clinicians about impairments in the landing mechanism but data should be interpreted cautiously.","PeriodicalId":53303,"journal":{"name":"Sports","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Inter-Rater and Intra-Rater Reliability of Raters with Different Levels of Experience When Using Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) in Field-Based Screening of Professional Football Players\",\"authors\":\"Nikolaos I. Liveris, Charis Tsarbou, Sofia A. Xergia, Angelos Papadopoulos, Elias Tsepis\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/sports12090242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is essential for physical sports therapists to use reliable field-based tests to identify potential injury risk factors in athletes. The purpose of this study was to compare the inter- and intra-rater reliability of experienced and novice raters during use of the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) in a field-based examination of professional football athletes. Thirty-seven male football athletes underwent pre-season LESS assessment. Two raters independently evaluated the recorded landing techniques at two separate intervals, two months apart, following the LESS standard protocol. Inter-and intra-rater values were calculated for the LESS total scores and individual scoring items. The overall LESS scores had excellent intra-rater reliability values for both the experienced (interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.89–0.97; p < 0.001) and novice rater (ICC = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.90–0.97; p < 0.001), and very good to excellent inter-rater values for the first (ICC = 0.90, 95% CI, 0.77–0.95; p < 0.001) and second (ICC = 0.86, 95% CI, 0.71–0.93; p < 0.001) evaluation. Most of the individual scoring items ranged from moderate to perfect agreement. In conclusion, sports physical therapists, regardless of experience, can reliably use the LESS’s total score, through video analysis of the regime. Individual scoring items can inform clinicians about impairments in the landing mechanism but data should be interpreted cautiously.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53303,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports\",\"volume\":\"80 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/sports12090242\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/sports12090242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

物理运动治疗师必须使用可靠的现场测试来识别运动员潜在的受伤风险因素。本研究的目的是在对职业足球运动员进行实地检查时,比较有经验的评分员和新手评分员在使用着地误差评分系统(LESS)时的评分间可靠性和评分内可靠性。37 名男性足球运动员接受了季前 LESS 评估。两名评分员按照 LESS 标准协议,分别在两个月的时间间隔内对记录的着地技术进行了独立评估。计算了 LESS 总分和各个评分项目的评分者之间和评分者内部的数值。对于经验丰富的评分者(类间相关系数 (ICC) = 0.95,95% CI,0.89-0.97;p < 0.001)和新手评分者(ICC = 0.95,95% CI,0.90-0.97;p < 0.001),第一次评估(ICC = 0.90,95% CI,0.77-0.95;p < 0.001)和第二次评估(ICC = 0.86,95% CI,0.71-0.93;p < 0.001)的评分者之间的数值为非常好到极好。大多数单项评分项目的一致性在中等到完全一致之间。总之,运动理疗师,无论经验如何,都可以通过对制度进行视频分析,可靠地使用 LESS 的总分。单个评分项目可为临床医生提供有关着地机制损伤的信息,但应谨慎解释数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of Inter-Rater and Intra-Rater Reliability of Raters with Different Levels of Experience When Using Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) in Field-Based Screening of Professional Football Players
It is essential for physical sports therapists to use reliable field-based tests to identify potential injury risk factors in athletes. The purpose of this study was to compare the inter- and intra-rater reliability of experienced and novice raters during use of the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) in a field-based examination of professional football athletes. Thirty-seven male football athletes underwent pre-season LESS assessment. Two raters independently evaluated the recorded landing techniques at two separate intervals, two months apart, following the LESS standard protocol. Inter-and intra-rater values were calculated for the LESS total scores and individual scoring items. The overall LESS scores had excellent intra-rater reliability values for both the experienced (interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.89–0.97; p < 0.001) and novice rater (ICC = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.90–0.97; p < 0.001), and very good to excellent inter-rater values for the first (ICC = 0.90, 95% CI, 0.77–0.95; p < 0.001) and second (ICC = 0.86, 95% CI, 0.71–0.93; p < 0.001) evaluation. Most of the individual scoring items ranged from moderate to perfect agreement. In conclusion, sports physical therapists, regardless of experience, can reliably use the LESS’s total score, through video analysis of the regime. Individual scoring items can inform clinicians about impairments in the landing mechanism but data should be interpreted cautiously.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sports
Sports SPORT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.40%
发文量
167
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Anthropometric Profile and Position-Specific Changes in Segmental Body Composition of Professional Football Players Throughout a Training Period. Effects of Maturation on Plantar Flexor Activity and Achilles Tendon Stiffness in Vertical Jumping: Sex Differences. Oxygenation Kinetics of Three Quadriceps Muscles During Squatting Exercise in Trained Men. Rebuilding Stability: Exploring the Best Rehabilitation Methods for Chronic Ankle Instability. Analysing the Relation between Passion, Motivation, and Subjective Well-Being in Sport: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1