ArticlePeerJ2024
Validity and reliability of a repeated multi-changes of direction agility test in senior soccer players.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Combined Repeated Sprint and Large-Sided Game Training on Physical Performance in Elite U20 Soccer Players: A Randomised Controlled Trial.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the validity, reliability, and sensitivity of repeated multi-changes of direction agility test (rMCOD) compared to a soccer-specific field test of repeated sprint ability (S-RSA) and repeated sprint ability test (RSA). Methods: Thirty-five healthy male soccer players (age: 18.4 ± 1.3 years) from Tunisan national soccer league (elite and sub-elite) took part in this study. They performed the tests in a randomized order over five sessions interspaced by at least 72 h. The construct, predictive and discriminant validity, relative and absolute reliability, and sensitivity of the tests were analyzed. The total and best time of the test (the sum for all trials and the trial with the lowest duration on nine, six, and seven attempts for rMCOD, RSA, and S-RSA, respectively), fatigue index, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and lactate concentration were recorded. Results: rMCOD correlated with both, S-RSA and RSA in total time (r = 0.85 and r = 0.52, respectively) and fatigue index (r = 0.74 and r = 0.83, respectively). Receiver operator characteristics were not able to discriminate between group levels (elite and sub-elite). When comparing training levels, only the fatigue index in S-RSA showed a difference between groups. Fatigue index, total time, and the best time in rMCOD showed Conclusion: rMCOD showed large to
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.