ArticleBiology of sport2016
Reliability and criterion-related validity of a new repeated agility test.
Article in Biology of sport, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04334772 (Effectiveness of Percutaneous Microelectrolysis and Stretching Exercises on Agility, Strength, and Knee Joint Range in Hamstring Tightness in Athletes), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Effectiveness of Percutaneous Microelectrolysis and Stretching Exercises on Agility, Strength, and Knee Joint Range in Hamstring Tightness in Athletes
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining performance changes using multiple goal setting with a focus on the SMART principle.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The impact of verbal encouragement during the repeated agility speed training on internal intensity, mood state, and physical enjoyment in youth soccer players.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Article
- Strength and Power Characteristics in National Amateur Rugby Players.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Convergent validity and reliability of a novel repeated agility protocol in junior rugby league players.F1000Research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aimed to assess the reliability and the criterion-related validity of a new repeated sprint T-test (RSTT) that includes intense multidirectional intermittent efforts. The RSTT consisted of 7 maximal repeated executions of the agility T-test with 25 s of passive recovery rest in between. Forty-five team sports players performed two RSTTs separated by 3 days to assess the reliability of best time (BT) and total time (TT) of the RSTT. The intra-class correlation coefficient analysis revealed a high relative reliability between test and retest for BT and TT (>0.90). The standard error of measurement (<0.50) showed that the RSTT has a good absolute reliability. The minimal detectable change values for BT and TT related to the RSTT were 0.09 s and 0.58 s, respectively. To check the criterion-related validity of the RSTT, players performed a repeated linear sprint (RLS) and a repeated sprint with changes of direction (RSCD). Significant correlations between the BT and TT of the RLS, RSCD and RSTT were observed (p<0.001). The RSTT is, therefore, a reliable and valid measure of the intermittent repeated sprint agility performance. As this ability is required in all team sports, it is suggested that team sports coaches, fitness coaches and sports scientists consider this test in their training follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.