ArticleSports (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Test-Retest Reliability of Ankle Mobility, Balance, and Jump Tests in Amateur Trail Running Athletes.
Article in Sports (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to test the reliability of seven functional performance tests in amateur trail runners, including ankle mobility, balance, hopping, and countermovement jump (CMJ) tests. The sample consisted of 35 runners who were evaluated in two sessions separated by 7 to 14 days, which varied due to participants' scheduling constraints. Relative reliability was assessed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC, which indicates consistency between repeated measures), the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM, which reflects measurement precision), and the Minimal Detectable Change (MDC, which represents the smallest real change beyond measurement error). The results show high reliability in almost all tests. The Lunge Test obtained an ICC of 0.990 and 0.983 for distance, and 0.941 and 0.958 for angular measurements in both legs. The Hop Tests showed moderate reliability with ICC above 0.7 In contrast, the Y Balance Test demonstrated lower reliability, with ICC values ranging from 0.554 to 0.732. The CMJ test showed good reliability, with an ICC ranging from 0.753 to 0.894, an SEM between 5.79% and 11.3%, and an MDC ranging from 15.54% to 31.44%, making it useful for assessing lower limb explosive strength. Both tests presented comparatively higher error values, which should be considered when interpreting individual changes. These findings support the use of these tests as valid and reliable tools for evaluating ankle dorsiflexion, balance, functional symmetry, and lower limb explosive strength in amateur trail runners, prior to training programs or injury prevention strategies, provided that standardized protocols and validated measuring instruments are used.
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.