ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Remote assessment of physical fitness via videoconferencing: a systematic review.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing muscle fitness changes to resistance training in healthy young adults using the 1-min sit-to-stand test: insights from a mobile app analysis.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Trial
- Article
- Machine Learning in Adapted Physical Activity: Clinical Applications, Monitoring, and Implementation Pathways for Personalized Exercise in Chronic Conditions: A Narrative Review.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Review
- Reference percentiles for children and adolescents for the digital motor performance test (DigiMot): results from the COMO-study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Validity and reliability of assessing strength and balance improvements by videoconference in pre-frail and frail older adults.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Article
- Validity, reliability, and feasibility of the digital motor performance test (DigiMot).Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Physical fitness is a critical marker of overall health across all age groups, influencing longevity and quality of life. This systematic review assessed the use of remote physical fitness assessments, a crucial adaptation during the COVID-19 pandemic that broadened access to health monitoring outside traditional settings. The review included 35 studies, covering various age groups and health conditions, and evaluated 48 physical fitness tests across eight physical fitness components. Balance, muscular strength, and endurance were the most frequently assessed, with tests like the 30-second sit-to-stand (30s-STS) showing strong validity, reliability, and feasibility for remote use. However, the study population was mainly adults and older adults, with nearly no focus on children, revealing a significant gap in research for younger populations. Additionally, the review identified gaps in assessing components such as body composition, reaction time, and agility, which are crucial for a comprehensive assessment of physical fitness. These gaps underscore the need for further research and development of reliable and valid remote assessment tools. The findings of this review emphasize the importance of standardizing remote physical fitness assessments to ensure their validity, reliability, and feasibility making them effective tools for health monitoring across diverse populations and settings.
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.