SynthesisSports medicine - open2025
The Development and Content of Movement Quality Assessments in Athletic Populations: A Systematic Review and Multilevel Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Sports medicine - open, 2025. 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.
- The reliability and measurement error of the movement quality assessment for athletes.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
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
backgroundDespite their prominence in the sport and human movement sciences, to date, there is no systematic insight about the development and content of movement quality assessments in athletic populations. This is an important gap to address, as it could yield both practical and scientific implications related to the continued screening of movement quality in athletic contexts. Hence, this study aimed to systematically review the (i) developmental approach, (ii) movements included, (iii) scoring system utilised, and (iv) the reliability of movement competency assessments used in athletic populations.
methodsElectronic databases (SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus) were searched for relevant articles up to 12 May 2023. Studies were included if they reported data about the developmental approach, movements included, scoring system utilised and reliability of assessment in an athletic population. A modified Downs and Black checklist was used to measure study quality.
resultsFrom a total of 131 identified studies: (i) 26 (20%) described the developmental approach of an assessment; (ii) 113 (86%) included descriptions of the movements included; (iii) 106 (81%) included a description of scoring system and criteria; and (iv) 77 (59%) studies included reliability statistics. There were 36 assessments identified within these studies, comprising 59 movements in total. Each assessment scored movement quality through a Likert or binary classification system.
conclusionFirst, the results demonstrate that choosing an appropriate movement quality assessment in an athletic population may be a complex process for practitioners as the development approach, movements included and scoring criteria vary substantially between assessments. Second, academics could use these results to help design new assessments for novel applications that meet rigour and reliability requirements. Third, these results have the potential to foster guidelines of use for the reliable assessment of movement quality in athletic populations.
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.