ArticleBMC pediatrics2024
Reliability and validity of the modified shuttle test-paeds to measure cardiorespiratory fitness in children.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundThe Modified Shuttle Test-Paeds (Paeds), a recently developed 10-meter Shuttle run test for aerobic capacity in children. This study aims to investigate the construct validity (known-group and convergent validity) and test-retest reliability of the recently developed test for cardiorespiratory fitness, the Modified Shuttle Test-Paeds (Paeds).
methodsA total of 144 participants (6-12 y) were tested on the Paeds test, and 84 children were tested on the 20-meter Shuttle Run test (20 m-SRT) to assess construct validity. To evaluate test-retest reliability, 46 children were tested twice on the Paeds.
resultsNo sex differences were found, but there was an age effect. A strong correlation was found between Paeds and the 20 m-SRT (r
conclusionPaeds appears to be a reliable and valid tool for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness in typically developing children aged 6-12 years and has the advantages of being shorter, needing less space, not requiring pacing and being self-motivational. More studies are needed to assess whether children reach an aerobic steady state in three minutes and how much of the results of the Paeds test can be explained by the agility component of the task (turning and grasping or aiming a bean bag). For clinical use, psychometric properties should be studied in various patient groups (e.g., ADHD, DCD, and children with intellectual disabilities).
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.