ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2024
Reliability agreement in foul and penalty judgements between officials in the Swedish hockey league.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Officials are essential in terms of player safety and injury prevention, especially in contact team sports such as ice hockey, where numerous fast pace and high force contacts occur. If against the rules, these collisions can result in penalties. However, there is limited literature on the inter-rater reliability of the officials' decisions. Hence, the purpose was to investigate the theoretical reliability agreement between professional ice hockey officials in the Swedish Hockey League (SHL). Method: Fifty video clips with different match situations were shown to 33 professional ice hockey officials in the SHL. Each situation was shown three times and the officials had 20 s between each video clip to answer which offence and penalty they would judge. The answers were anonymously collected using an online questionnaire. Fleiss' kappa was used to assess the reliability agreement between the referees, for each situation. Results: The Fleiss' kappa values for all officials were 0.63 and 0.35 for offences and penalties, respectively. Referees and linesmen had similar kappa values for offences (0.64 vs. 0.64), as well as for penalties (0.38 vs. 0.35). Conclusion: The results show that the suggested methodology can be used to identify situations where officials agree and disagree. In ice hockey, poor agreement regarding penalties can depend on the chosen offence as the rulebook limits the availability of penalties, based on the chosen offence. This can create issues, as there are situations where different offences are equally correct but will result in different penalties.
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.