ArticleJournal of human kinetics2023
Validity, Reliability, and Sensitivity of Mobile Applications to Assess Change of Direction Speed.
Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Reliability and validity of two shuffle-based change-of-direction tests in basketball players: A smartphone-based assessment.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2026Article
- Mobile Health (mHealth) Apps in Sport Training: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- International Standards for the 12-Minute Cooper Test on a Concept 2 Rowing Ergometer: Validity and Reliability of the Test.Journal of human kinetics · 2025Article
- Validity of Three Commercial Devices for Recording Movement Velocity in the Bulgarian Split Squat.Journal of human kinetics · 2025Article
- Physiological and Neuromuscular Fatigue after 3-Minute Lateral Shuffle Movement at Different Speeds and Distances.Journal of human kinetics · 2025Article
- Concurrent-Validity and Reliability of Photocells in Sport: A Systematic Review.Journal of human kinetics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the validity, reliability, and sensitivity of mobile applications for assessing change-of-direction speed (CODS) performance. Thirty college athletes performed two Illinois CODS tests during one session. Assessments were carried out simultaneously using six devices (the CODTimer app, Seconds Count app, StopwatchCamera app, two analog stopwatches, and timing gates). Validity analyses included Pearson's product-moment correlation analysis, a linear regression model, and Bland-Altman plots. Reliability analyses included the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the coefficient of variation (CV%), and the paired-sample t test. Sensitivity analyses included the typical error and smallest worthwhile change (SWC). The results showed that validity, reliability, and sensitivity values were higher for the CODTimer app (r = 0.99, R
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.