Measures of Reliability in Sports Medicine and Science

By W. Hopkins. Sports Medicine, 2000

4,938 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d66529ac36547455eabe1214e5510aee19d575fa

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

In Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Citations in the corpus

A new view of statistics (2002, methodology): “Here is a suitable reference for the book: Hopkins, W. G. (2000). A new view of statistics.”
Reliability and Factorial Validity of Squat and Countermovement Jump Tests (2004, methodology): “Within-subject variation for all tests was determined by calculating coefficient of variation (CV) as outlined by Hopkins (9).”
Validity of the Microsoft Kinect for assessment of postural control. (2012, methodology): “Specifically, the ICC2,1 coefficients were calculated in a 2-way analysis of variance based on absolute agreement while the ratio CV was calculated using the methods reported by Hopkins [19].”
Test–retest reliability, validity, and minimum detectable change of visual analog, numerical rating, and verbal rating scales for measurement of osteoarthritic knee pain (2018, background): “Although ICC provides a good measure of reproducibility, it was found to be sensitive to heterogeneity in the sample studied.(32) On the contrary, SEM provides a more reliable and practical indicator, and helps calculate the MDC.”
Velocity-Based Training: From Theory to Application (2020, background): “This can be estimated from a groupbased test-retest reliability study (2,39) or from the trend in an athlete’s individual test performance repeated across a theoretically stable period (e.”
The Validity and Reliability of Global Positioning Systems in Team Sport: A Brief Review. (2016, background): “Reliability refers to the reproducibility of values of a test on repeat occasions (17).”
Methodology review: using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for the assessment of body composition in athletes and active people. (2015, background): “one of the consequences of poor measurement validity is the reduction in ability to characterise relationships between variables in descriptive studies (Hopkins, 2000).”
Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. (2009, background): “Arguments have also been presented against the use of limits of agreement as a measure of reliability (13).”
Smallest real difference, a link between reproducibility and responsiveness (2001, methodology): “surement) as the only source of variance [1, 26].”
Reliability of Power in Physical Performance Tests (2001, methodology): “on different ergometers, preferably with the same participants,[1] would be valuable.”
Validity, Reliability and Sensitivity of Measures of Sporting Performance (2008, methodology): “of variables, digital recording techniques were em- son and Nevill[7] and Hopkins[6]).”
Testing soccer players (2005, background): “These issues are addressed by determining the reliability and the validity of the test concerned (Boddington, Lambert, St Clair Gibson, & Noakes, 2001; Hopkins, 2000).”
Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. (2005, methodology): “Hopkins (26) argues that because the 1-way model combines influences of random and systematic error together, ‘‘The resulting statistic is biased high and is hard to interpret because the relative contributions of random error and changes in the mean are unknown.”