Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33362647›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020

Design, Validation, and Reliability of an Observational Instrument for Technical and Tactical Actions in Singles Badminton.

Gema Torres-Luque, Juan Carlos Blanca-Torres, José María Giménez-Egido, David Cabello-Manrique, Enrique Ortega-Toro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Gema Torres-LuqueFaculty of Humanities and Education Sciences, University of Jaén, Jaén, Spain.
Juan Carlos Blanca-TorresFaculty of Humanities and Education Sciences, University of Jaén, Jaén, Spain.
José María Giménez-EgidoSports Performance Analysis Association, Murcia, Spain.
David Cabello-ManriqueDepartment of Physical Education and Sports, Sport Science Faculty, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Enrique Ortega-ToroSports Performance Analysis Association, Murcia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technical and tactical actions are decisive in terms of badminton player competitive performance. The main objective of this research was to design, validate, and estimate the reliability of an observational instrument for the analysis of the tactical and technical actions in individual badminton. The process was carried out in four different steps: first, there was a review of the scientific literature and a preliminary list of variables was made; second, a qualitative and quantitative assessment was completed by 10 badminton expert judges; in the third step, the content validity was estimated using Aiken's V coefficient; finally, intra-observer reliability and interobserver reliability were tested by two observers specialized in badminton using the Cohen's Kappa coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Strokes were used as the unit of measure by our observational instrument; every time badminton players hit the shuttlecock, 22 variables (eight contextual variables, seven variables related to the result of the match, and seven variables related to the game) are observed. The minimum Aiken's value was 0.58, and reliability was 0.63. In spite of these values, none of the variables had to be removed, but there were modifications in terms of drafting in some of them. The main findings confirmed the validity and the usefulness of this instrument.

Indexed as

badmintonobservational methodologyperformance analysisracket sportstest

Identifiers

PMID33362647
PMCPMC7758221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.