ArticleInternational journal of exercise science2025
Development and Validation of a Running Drill Test Battery to Predict 5 m and 20 m Sprint Performance.
Article in International journal of exercise science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effects of Different Warm-Up Protocols on Sprint Performance.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The effects of an 8-week Exer-Genie-assisted speed and ABC drill training program on speed, hamstring strength, and vertical jump performance in female football players.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and predictive validity of specific athletic running drills: A-skip, B-skip, bounding step, and jumps, in relation to sprint performance over 5 m and 20 m distances. Sixty-three young males (mean age: 21.3 ± 2.1 years; body height: 183 ± 6.5 cm; body weight: 77 ± 9.3 kg) were enrolled in the study. Running drill performance was recorded on an athletics track using high-speed cameras and evaluated based on predefined criteria and a scoring system. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and coefficients of variation (CV). Predictive validity was determined via Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression analyses. The results indicated good to excellent inter-rater reliability for A-skip (ICC = 0.897) and jumps (ICC = 0.9), while B-skip and bounding step showed good reliability (ICC = 0.808 and 0.874, respectively). The 20 m sprint demonstrated excellent reliability (ICC = 0.969, CV = 2.07%), while the 5 m sprint had good reliability (ICC = 0.863, CV = 3.58%). B-skip emerged as the strongest predictor for both sprint distances, with significant negative associations (5 m: β = -0.531,
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.