Background
Stage 1: Methods
Literature search
Selection criteria for the studies
Sports context
Physiological characteristics
Participants
Search strategy
Selection of articles
Data extraction
Results: Stage 1
Description of included studies
Author | Sample size |
ƪAge (years) | Target Population | Study design | Country | Sport | Physiological construct |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Appleby et al. (2012) [80] | 20 | 24.4 ± 3.4–26.4 ± 3.4 | Adults | Longitudinal | Australia | Rugby union | Strength |
Argus et al. (2012) [13] | 112 | 16.6 ± 0.8–24.4 ± 2.7 | Adolescents & Adults | Cross-sectional | New Zealand | Rugby union | Strength, power |
Atkins (2006) [103] | 50 | 21.1 ± 4.7–22.1 ± 5.0 | Adults | Cross-sectional | England | Rugby league |
aHIRA |
Austin et al. (2013) [24] | 36 | 24.4 ± 3–24 ± 4 | Adults | Test re-test | Australia | Rugby league & union |
bHIEP |
Baker (2009) [81] | 64 | 19.5 ± 1.7–25.0 ± 3.3 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Strength-endurance |
Baker and Newton (2008) [77] | 40 | 22.6 ± 3.6–25.3 ± 3.4 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Strength, power, agility, speed. |
Baker (2002) [78] | 95 | 16.2 ± 1.2–23.5 ± 3.2 | Adolescents & Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Strength, power |
Bradley et al. (2015) [5] | 45 | 21–33 | Adults | Longitudinal (repeated measures) | England | Rugby union | Speed, strength |
Comfort et al. (2011) [75] | 18 | 21.7 ± 4.1 | Adults | Cross-sectional | England | Rugby league | Speed, agility, power, strength |
Cobley et al. (2014) [47] | 1172 | U13-U15 players | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby league | Muscular power, speed, change of direction speed, maximal aerobic power |
Darrall-Jones et al. (2015) [53] | 67 | 15.5 ± 0.3–19.0 ± 1.1 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | England | Rugby union | Speed, agility, power, aHIRA |
Darrall-Jones et al. (2015b) [59] | 67 | 15.4 ± 0.3–19.3 ± 1.2 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | England | Rugby union | Speed, aHIRA, maximal aerobic speed |
De Lacey et al. (2014) [104] | 39 | 24 ± 3 | Adults | Cross-sectional | New Zealand | Rugby league | Speed, strength, power |
Delaney et al. (2015) [72] | 31 | 24.3 ± 4.4 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, change of direction ability, strength, power |
Durandt et al. (2014) [27] | 174 | U16-U18 players | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | South-Africa | Rugby union | Speed, agility, strength, endurance, aerobic fitness |
Gabbett (2000) [61] | 35 | 26.5 ± 5.1 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, power, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett (2002a) [30] | 159 | 12.3–25.1 | Adolescents & Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Power, speed, agility, estimated V02MAX
|
Meir et al. 2001 [105] | 146 | N/m | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia and England | Rugby league | Strength, endurance speed, agility |
Gabbett (2005a) [31] | 240 | 16–18 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Power, speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett (2005b) [32] | 45 | – | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby League | Power, speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett (2005c) [33] | 68 | ≥ 18 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Power, speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett (2006) [34] | 415 | 21.1 ± 3.4–25.7 ± 5.6 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Power, speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett et al. (2007) [35] | 86 | 22.5 ± 4.9 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Power, speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett et al. (2008a) [19] | 42 | 23.6 ± 5.3 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, change of direction speed |
Gabbett et al. (2008b) [36] | 35 | 14.1 ± 0.2–16.9 ± 0.3 | Adolescents | Longitudinal (repeated measures) | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, power, muscular endurance, agility, maximum aerobic power |
Gabbett (2009) [73] | 12 | 24.4 ± 3.5 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Acceleration, power, change of direction speed |
Gabbett (2009b) [37] | 88 | 13.2 ± 0.6–16.5 ± 0.3 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, change of direction speed, power, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett et al. (2011a) [16] | 58 | 23.8 ± 3.8 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, repeated sprint ability, change of direction speed, power, prolonged HIRA |
Gabbett et al. (2011b) [49] | 86 | 23.3 ± 3.8 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, change of direction, power, repeated sprint ability, prolonged HIRA, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett et al. (2013) [50] | 38 | 23.1 ± 2.7 | Adults | Prospective cohort experimental design | Australia | Rugby league | Repeated sprint ability, prolonged HIRA, maximal aerobic power. |
Gabbett et al. (2009c) [65] | 64 | 15.9 ± 0.6–16.0 ± 0.2 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, change of direction speed, muscular power, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett & Seibold (2013) [15] | 32 | 24 ± 3 | Adults | Prospective cohort design | Australia | Rugby league | Strength, strength endurance, power, prolonged HIRA |
Galvin et al. (2013) [29] | 30 | 18.4 ± 1.5 | Adolescents | Single-blind placebo controlled design | England | Rugby league & union | Repeated sprint training, speed, prolonged HIRA |
Green et al. (2011) [6] | 28 | 19 ± 1.3–19 ± 1.7 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | Ireland | Rugby union | Speed, change of direction ability |
Hansen et al. (2011) [79] | 40 | 23.7 ± 5.0 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby union | Speed, power |
Holloway et al. (2008) [70] | 12 | 21.5 ± 2.2 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Anaerobic endurance |
Jarvis et al. (2009) [10] | 19 | 23.0 ± 5.4 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Wales | Rugby union | Speed, agility, maximum aerobic power |
Johnston & Gabbett (2011) [51] | 12 | 22.7 ± 2.2 | Adults | Randomized, counterbalanced cross over experimental | Scotland | Rugby league | Repeated sprint ability & effort |
Johnston et al. (2015) [54] | 31 | 16.5 ± 0.5 | Adolescents | Between groups, repeated measures experimental design | Australia | Rugby league | HIRA |
Johnston et al. (2015b) [60] | 21 | 19.2 ± 0.7 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | HIRA, muscular strength, power |
Kirkpatrick and Comfort (2013) [38] | 24 | 18.7 ± 0.9 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | England | Rugby league | Power, strength, speed |
Krause et al. (2015) [76] | 485 | U12-U15 | Adolescent | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby union | Speed, power |
Lombard et al. (2015) [7] | 453 | 18.1 ± 0.7 | Adolescents | Repeated cross-sectional design | South Africa | Rugby union | Strength, endurance, speed |
Moore and Murphy (2003) [71] | 15 | 22.5 ± 2.5 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby union | Anaerobic capacity |
Meir et al. (2001) [58] | 146 | N/m | Adults | Cross-sectional | England and Australia | Rugby league | Speed, Muscle strength, power, endurance, agility |
Parsonage et al. (2014) [39] | 156 | 15 ± 7 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | UK | Rugby union | Power, speed, endurance capacity |
Pienaar and Coetzee (2013) [28] | 40 | 18.9 ± 0.4 | Adolescents | Pre-posttest, randomized experimental design | South Africa | Rugby union | Power, acceleration, speed, agility, anaerobic capacity |
Scott et al. (2015) [68] | 55 | 15.6 ± 0.3–19.4 ± 0.5 | Adolescents | Test retest, comparative cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Prolonged HIRA |
Serpell et al. (2010) [74] | 30 | ≥ 18 | Adolescents & Adults | Within subject & between subject experimental design | Australia | Rugby league | Agility |
Smart and Gill (2013) [42] | 44 | 15.3 ± 1.3 | Adolescents | Pre-post experimental control design | New Zealand | Rugby union | Strength, power, speed, anaerobic and aerobic running |
Smart et al. (2013) [52] | 1161 | *N/m | Adults | Retrospective, secondary data analysis | New Zealand | Rugby union | Strength, power, speed, repeated sprint ability. |
Smart et al. (2014) [17] | 510 | *N/m | Adults | Retrospective, secondary data analyses | New Zealand | Rugby union | Strength, speed, power, repeated sprint ability |
Till et al. (2016) [18] | 81 | U17-U19 | Adolescents & Adults | Cross-sectional, Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby League | Speed, Muscular power, strength Endurance, |
Till et al. (2014a) [69] | 133 | 15.5–20.1 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | England | Rugby league | Power, speed, endurance, strength |
Till et al. (2014b) [55] | 75 | 13.0–19.9 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | England | Rugby league | Power, speed, endurance, strength. |
Till et al. (2015) [56] | 130 | U16-U20 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | England | Rugby league | Power, speed, endurance, strength |
Till and Jones (2015) [57] | 121 | 12.8–15.5 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | England | Rugby league | Power, speed, endurance |
Till et al. (2011) [43] | 1172 | 13.57 ± 0.27–15.57 ± 0.27 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby league | Muscular power, Speed, change of direction speed, maximal aerobic uptake |
Till et al. (2013) [44] | 81 | 13.6 ± 0.2 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby League | Muscular power, speed, change of direction, maximal aerobic power |
Till et al. (2014c) [45] | 81 | 13.62 ± 0.24 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby League | Muscular power, speed, change of direction speed, maximal aerobic power |
Till et al. (2016b) [41] | 580 | U13-U15 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby League | Speed, Change of direction speed, Muscular power, maximal aerobic power |
Till et al. (2013b) [46] | 1172 | U13-U15 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby League | Speed, muscular power, change of direction speed, maximal aerobic power |
Till et al. (2016c) [66] | 257 | U15 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby league | Muscular power, speed, change of direction speed, maxiam aerobic power |
Till et al. (2015b) [67] | 580 | 13.60 ± 0.55–13.80 ± 0.72 | Adolescents | Cross-sectional | United Kingdom | Rugby League | Speed, change of direction speed, muscular power, maximal oxygen uptake. |
Till et al. (2010) [48] | 683 | 13.6 ± 0.27–15.54 ± 0.27 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | United Kingdom | Rugby league | Speed, change of direction speed, muscular power, maximal oxygen uptake. |
Vaz et al. (2014) [12] | 46 | 26.2 ± 2.8–26.7 ± 2.9 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Portugal | Rugby union | Strength, speed, maximal aerobic power |
Waldron et al. (2014a) [62] | 28 | 15.1 ± 0.4–17.0 ± 0.4 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, power, aerobic endurance |
Waldron et al. (2014b) [63] | 13 | 15.1 ± 0.3–17.0 ± 0.3 | Adolescents | Longitudinal | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, power, aerobic endurance |
Gabbett (2002b) [64] | 66 | 24 ± 4 | Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Power, speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Gabbett (2006b) [40] | 77 | 16.7–27.3 | Adolescents & Adults | Cross-sectional | Australia | Rugby league | Speed, agility, maximal aerobic power |
Physiological characteristics and the corresponding tests
Physiological construct* | Corresponding test(s) | Reference(s) | N |
---|---|---|---|
Speed | 10 m, 20 m and 40 m sprint test | 12 | |
10 m, 20 m, 30, and 60 m sprint test | 8 | ||
10 m and 40 m sprint test | 7 | ||
10 m and 20 m sprint test | 6 | ||
5 m, 10 m and 20 m sprint test | 3 | ||
10 m, 20 m and 30 m sprint test | 3 | ||
10 m and 30 m sprint test | 2 | ||
5 m, 10 m, 20 m and 40 m sprint test | 2 | ||
10 m and 60 m sprint test | [66] | 1 | |
10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint test | [64] | 1 | |
10 m, 30 m and 40 m sprint test | [76] | 1 | |
10 m, 20 m, 30 m, 40 m and 50 m sprint test | [8] | 1 | |
5 m, 10 m and 30 m sprint test | [79] | 1 | |
5 m and 10 m sprint test | [73] | 1 | |
15 m and 40 m sprint test | [58] | 1 | |
20 m sprint test | [63] | 1 | |
Repeated-sprint ability | Repeated 20 m sprint test | 5 | |
Rugby specific repeated speed (RS2) test | 2 | ||
Repeated-effort ability | Repeated effort ability test | [51] | 1 |
Repeated high intensity exercise performance | Repeated high intensity exercise (RHIE) Back test | [24] | 1 |
Repeated high intensity exercise (RHIE) RL Forward test | [24] | 1 | |
Repeated high intensity exercise (RHIE) RU Forward test | [24] | 1 | |
Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability/Endurance | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | 8 | |
Repeated 12 s sprint shuttle speed test | 3 | ||
Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 2) | [24] | 1 | |
Multistage fitness test | [57] | 1 | |
5 min run | [58] | 1 | |
Maximal aerobic power/uptake | Multistage fitness test | 29 | |
Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | [69] | 1 | |
30–15 Intermittent Fitness test (30–15IFT) | [68] | 1 | |
1500 m run (Metabolic Fitness Index) | [42] | 1 | |
Maximal aerobic speed/Anaerobic speed reserve | 30–15 Intermittent Fitness test (30–15IFT) | 2 | |
Anaerobic endurance | Triple 120 m shuttle (T120S) test | [70] | 1 |
Wingate 60 (w60) cycle test | [70] | 1 | |
300 m shuttle run test | [71] | 1 | |
400 m sprint test (Metabolic Fitness Index for Team Sports) | [42] | 1 | |
Change of direction speed/Agility | (Agility) 505 test | 17 | |
L-run | 7 | ||
Illinois Agility test | 3 | ||
Modified 505 test | 2 | ||
Change of direction speed test | 2 | ||
Agility test | [75] | 1 | |
Novel agility test (no specific name given) | [77] | 1 | |
Lower body muscular power | Vertical (Sargent) jump test | 15 | |
Countermovement jump test (CMJ) | 22 | ||
Jump squat test | 5 | ||
Lower body muscular strength | 1 repetition maximum (RM) back squat | 9 | |
1 RM box squat | 2 | ||
3 RM back squat | 2 | ||
Isometric squat on force plate | [75] | 1 | |
Upper body muscular power | 2 kg medicine ball chest throw | 9 | |
20s push up test | [36] | 1 | |
Overhead medicine ball throw | [73] | 1 | |
Bench throw | [13] | 1 | |
20s chin up test | [36] | 1 | |
Plyometric Press-up | [60] | ||
Upper body muscular strength | 1RM bench press | 13 | |
1RM chin up test | 2 | ||
3RM bench press | 2 | ||
Push test | [27] | 1 | |
Prone row | [18] | 1 | |
Upper body muscular endurance | 60s push up test | [36] | 1 |
60s chin up test | [36] | 1 | |
Bench press repetitions-to-fatigue at 60% 1RM | [81] | ||
1RM Bench press repetitions-to-fatigue at 60 kg | [81] | 1 | |
1RM Bench press repetitions-to-fatigue at 102.5 kg | [81] | ||
Pull up test | [7] | 1 | |
Body mass bench press with repetition | [15] | 1 | |
30s plyometric push-up test | [58] | 1 | |
Abdominal endurance | 60s sit-up | [58] | 1 |
Physiological construct(s) | Tests identified | Basic description on how the tests were performed in included studies | Outcome measures | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Speed | 5 m, 10 m, 15 m, 20 m, 30, 40 m, 50 m and 60 m sprint tests | Players run along the 60 m distance from a pre-determined starting point. Running speed evaluated at 5 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m, 40 m, 50 m and 60 m using dual beam electronic timing gates. | Total sprint time per each distance (s) | |
Repeated sprinting ability (RSA) | Repeated 20 m sprint tests | Players perform 10 or 12 maximal effort sprints over a 20 m distance with each sprint performed on a 20 or 30-s cycle. Recovery characterised by walking around the cone 10 m from the end of the sprint track. | Total repeated sprint time (s), percentage decrement, average heart rate (b.min−1), peak heart rate (b.min−1), rating of perceived exertion. | |
Rugby-specific repeated speed (RS2) test | The test consists of three sets of three or four individual sprints performed maximally at set time intervals. Each set of sprints is separated by periods of standardised work where the players jog with a weighted bag. Players repeated sprints are measured using electronic timing gates over the same distance as speed (30 m for backs and 20 m for forwards and half backs). | Mean time per sprint (s), *fatigue, mean of 12 sprints for 20 m for forwards and the mean of 9 sprints for 30 m for backs | ||
Repeated effort ability (REA) | Repeated-effort test | The protocol comprises of 12 × 20 m sprints and tackles with each sprint commencing every 20s and the tackle performed after each 20 m sprint. | Total repeated effort time(s), % decrement, average heart rate (b.min−1), peak heart rate (b.min−1), rating of perceived exertion | [51] |
Repeated high intensity exercise performance (RHIE) | RHIE Backs test | Each player complete 3 × 20 m sprints on a 20s cycle. After 3 sprints, players complete 2 tackles 10 m away with 20s recovery. This drill is repeated three times for each participant. | Individual sprint time (s), sum of sprint time (s), decrement in sprint time over the 3 sets of sprints (s) | [24] |
RHIE RL Forward test | Similar to the RHIE Backs test, except that players complete 5 tackles in each circuit. | Sum of sprint times (s), decrement in sprint time (s) | [24] | |
RHIE RU Forward test | Each player complete 3 × 20 m sprints on a 20s cycle. After 3 sprints, players complete a ‘scrum sled shuttle’ four times. Then players repeat the sprint shuttles (3 × 20 m). After that, players tackle a tackle bag at 10 m four times | Total sprint time (s), decrement in sprint performance (s) | [24] | |
Prolonged high intensity intermittent running ability/Endurance | Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Players perform 2 × 20 m runs back and forth at a progressively increasing speed keeping to a series of beeps/audio signals from compact disc. Players perform the test at level 1. | Total distance covered (m), last level reached | |
Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 2) | Same as above but the test is performed at level 2. | Total distance covered (m) | [24] | |
Repeated 12 s sprint shuttle speed test | Players perform 8 × 12 s maximal effort shuttles (sprinting forward 20 m, turning 180 degrees and sprinting 20 m), each shuttle performed at 48 s cycle. | Total sprint distance, percentage decrement | ||
Multistage fitness test | Players run back and forth along a 20 m track keeping in time with the series of beeps on a compact disc with the speed progressively increased until volitional exhaustion. | Total distance covered (m) | [57] | |
5 min run | Players are required to cover as much distance as possible around the course in a 5-min period. | Total distance covered (m) | [58] | |
Maximal aerobic fitness | Multistage(shuttle run) fitness test | Same as above | Number of shuttles/laps/levels completed, total distance covered (m), predicted VO2MAX
| |
Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Players perform 20 m runs back and forth at a progressively increasing speed keeping to a series of beeps/audio signals from compact disc. Players perform the test at level 1. | VO2MAX predicted via the equation: distance run (m) × 0.0084 + 36.4 | [69] | |
30–15 Intermittent Fitness test (30–15IFT) | 30s shuttle runs interspersed with 15 s periods of passive recovery. Players run back and forth between 2 lines 40 m apart at a pace governed by a pre-recorded beep. | Last stage reached, running velocity (VIFT) | [68] | |
1500 m run (Metabolic Fitness Index for Team Sports) | Players would perform the 1500 m run on a synthetic running track. | Time taken to complete the distance (m) | [42] | |
Maximal aerobic speed/Anaerobic speed reserve | 30–15 Intermittent Fitness test (30–15IFT) | 30s shuttle runs interspersed with 15 s periods of passive recovery. Players run back and forth between 2 lines 40 m apart at a pace governed by a pre-recorded beep. | Maximal aerobic speed (MAS), Anaerobic speed reserve (ASR) | |
Anaerobic endurance | Triple 120 m shuttle (T120S) test | Players perform 3 sets of 120 m shuttle sequences. | Time taken to complete the 120 m shuttle, maximum heart rate, blood lactate, rating of perceived exertion | [70] |
Wingate 60 (w60) cycle test | Each player will perform a 60s all out maximal effort on a cycle ergometer according to the Wingate protocol. | Maximal heart rate, blood lactate, rating of perceived exertion | [70] | |
300 m shuttle run test | Players sprint maximally between two lines, 15 times, for a total distance of 300 m. | Total time to complete the run (s) | [51] | |
400 m sprint test (Metabolic Fitness Index for Team Sports) | Players run maximally an entire lap of the track for 400 m. | Time to complete the run (s) | [42] | |
Agility/change of direction speed (CODS) | 505 test | Players assume a starting position 10 m from timing gates. They accelerate as quickly as possible along the 15-m distance, pivot on the 5 m line or turn 180 degrees at the 15 m mark and return as quickly as possible through the timing gates placed 5 m from a designated turning point | Total time taken (s) | |
L-run | Three cones placed 5 m apart in an ‘L’ shape. Players run as quickly as possible along the 5 m, turn left, run forward 5 m, turn 180 degrees and follow same course to finish and dual beam electronic timing gates used to record time. | Total time taken (s) | ||
Illinois Agility test | Players start lying in prone on the starting line. On a signal the players stand up and accelerate towards and around the cones set up. They can sprint for 9 m return to the starting line; they swerve in and out of the four cones completing two 9 m sprints to finish the agility course. | Total time taken to complete the course (s) | ||
Modified 505 test | Two timing gates placed 5 m apart from s designated turning point; unlike the traditional 505 test where players start at 10 m from the timing gates and therefore 15 m from the turning point, players start 5 m from the timing gates, pivot on the 5 m line and return as quickly as possible through the timing gates | Total time taken to complete the course (s) | ||
Change of direction speed test | Players sprint forward 5 m then perform a 45 degree change of direction manoeuvre to pass through either left or right finish gate. | Total time taken to complete the course (s) | ||
Agility test | Players sprint 5 m through the first timing gates to the second timing gates and sprint back to the third timing gate positioned at the starting line 5 m from the first and sprint back to the fourth timing gate positioned 5 m away from the second time to finish the course | Total time taken to complete the course (s) | [75] | |
Novel agility test (no specific name given) | Players sprint 1 m at a 45 degree angle, turn around a marker cone, sprint at 45 degrees for 10 m back to starting line. Here they make 135 degree turn around another cone and sprint 20 m in a straight line perpendicular to the goal line | Total time taken to complete the course (s) | [77] | |
Lower body muscular power | Vertical jump test | Using a Yardstick device or a board, players stand with feet flat on the ground, fully extended arms and hands, and mark the standing reach height. After assuming a crouch position, players spring upward and touch the yardstick device or the board at the highest possible point. | Vertical jump height calculated as the distance from the highest point reached during and the highest reaching during the vertical jump | |
Countermovement jump test (CMJ) | Players put hands on hips and jump from the jump mat or portable force plate from a standing position moving from a self-selected depth in squatting and jump explosively as far as possible. A Takei vertical jump metre may be used. | Jump height, peak power, vertical power was estimated by equation: CMJ power (W) =61.9 × Jump height + 36.0 × body mass-1822. | ||
Jump squat test | Players self-select foot position and lower the Olympic bar 40 kg to a self-selected depth and then the players are required to jump as explosively as possible. The bar will be resting on upper trapezius. Loaded jump squat may have a resistance of 20 kg to 100kgs conducted using the Plyometric Power System (PPS) or 40 kg jump squat from a force plate. | Mechanical power output | ||
Lower body muscular strength | One repetition maximum back squat (1RM BS) | Using an Olympic bar and free weights, players back squat until the top of the thigh is parallel with the ground and return to a standing position to record one repetition maximum. | Maximum weight lifted (kgs) | |
Isometric squat on force plate | Players stand on a force plate with the bar of a Smith Machine resting on upper trapezius at a height which results in an angle of 135 degrees knee flexion. | Peak force generated (n) | [75] | |
1 RM box squat | Players use a self-selected foot position and lower themselves to sitting position briefly on the box and then return to standing position | One repetition maximum (kgs) | ||
3RM full squat exercise | Players perform this with the free weight Olympic-style barbell. Players lower their body until thighs are past parallel with the floor and fully extend the hip and knee joints | Maximum weight lifted (kgs) | [15] | |
Upper body muscular strength | One repetition maximum bench press (1RM BP) | Players in supine, feet flat on floor, hips and shoulders in contact with the bench, lower the bar to touch the chest and push the bar until the elbows are locked out. | Maximum weight lifted (kg) | |
3RM bench press | The test is performed as above at three repetition maximum | Maximum weight lifted (kg) | ||
1RM chin up test | Players use a reverse underhand grip (palms facing towards face). Players instructed to start from a stationary position with arms fully extended and complete a repetition with the chin moving over the bar | One repetition maximum (kgs) | ||
Push-Up test | Players begin in prone, with hands on the floor, thumbs shoulder width apart and elbows fully extended. Players are instructed to descend to the tester fist placed on the floor below the players’ sternum and then ascend until the elbows are straight. | The number of push-ups in one minute (n) | [27] | |
1RM Prone row | Participants lay face down on a bench with the bench height determined by the players reach when the arms are fully extended. Participants have to pull the barbell towards the bench and the lift will be recorded if both sides of the barbell touch the bench | Maximum weight lifted (kg) | [18] | |
Upper body muscular power | 20s push up test | Players assume prone position, body lowered until the elbows are 90 degrees, followed by a return to the starting position with arms fully extended. | Time taken to complete 20 full push ups (s) | [36] |
20s chin up test | Players assume a hanging position on the bar, hands shoulder width apart with supinated grip and arms extended. Players are to raise the body until the chin touched the top of the bar with the head in neutral position. | Maximum number of chin-ups in 20 s | [36] | |
Overhead ball throw test | Players stand with 1 ft aligned with the a line marked on the ground facing the throwing direction, with a 3 kg medicine ball held in both hands behind the head, each player is required to plant the front foot with the toe behind the line and to throw the medicine ball overhead as far as possible. | Maximum distance thrown (m) | [73] | |
Chest throw test | Players throw a 2 kg medicine ball horizontally as far as possible while seated with the back against the wall | Maximum distance thrown (m) | ||
Bench throw test | Players use a self-selected hand position and lower the bar to a self-selected depth approximately 90 degrees at the elbow and then throw or propel the bar vertically as explosively as possible. | Maximum weight thrown (kgs) | [13] | |
Upper body muscular endurance | 60s push up test | Players assume prone position, body lowered until the elbows are 90 degrees, followed by a return to the starting position with arms fully extended. | Maximum number of push-ups in 60s | [36] |
60s chin up test | Players assume a hanging position on the bar, hands shoulder width apart with supinated grip and arms extended. Players are to raise the body until the chin touched the top of the bar with the head in neutral position. | Maximum number of chin ups in 60s | [36] | |
Bench Press repetitions-to-fatigue (BP RTF) | Players perform bench press repetitions as possible till fatigue at two markedly different resistances of 60-kgs and 102.5-kgs | Number of repetitions (n) | [81] | |
Bench press repetitions-to-fatigue at 60% 1RM | Players perform bench press repetitions as possible till fatigue with a resistance of 60% of their one repetition maximum bench press | Number of repetitions at 60% 1RM BP | [81] | |
Pull up test | Using an underhand grip, and the hands 10–15 cm apart, players start in the hanging position and ascended to a position with the chin above the bar and then return to starting position with arms extended. | Maximal number of completed pull-ups | [7] | |
Body mass bench press with repetition | Using players body mass as resistance for as many repetitions as possible until fatigue | Number of repetitions (n) | [15] | |
30s Plyometric push up | Participants would take a push-up position supporting self on the palm of left or right hand with the other hand placed on the top of a 5 kg medicine ball. The players then lower themselves to the ground until elbows are 90 degrees; they then forcefully pushes back with complete extension of the arms, while shifting the hand on the ground across to the new position on the medicine ball. Similarly, the hand on the ball shift across to a position approximately 2 shoulder widths on the opposite side of the ball | Maximum number of repetitions in designated time period | [58] | |
Abdominal endurance | 60s Sit up | Participants would sit with feet flat on the floor and held in position by another player. The arms would be crossed at the shoulders and knees bent at an angle approximately 90 degrees. On command, the players would curl the trunk so that elbows touch the front of the thighs and then return to starting position | Maximum number of repetitions in 60s | [58] |
Speed
Repeated sprint and effort ability
Repeated high-intensity exercise performance
Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability/endurance
Maximal aerobic power and speed
Anaerobic endurance
Change of direction speed/agility
Lower-body muscular power and strength
Upper-body muscular power and strength
Upper-body and abdominal muscular endurance
Stage 2: Methods
Literature search, search strategy and eligibility criteria
Data extraction
Quality assessment of the clinimetric studies and measurement properties
Measurement property | Definition | (Rating) Quality criteriaa, b
|
---|---|---|
Reliability | ||
Internal consistency | The extent to which items in a (sub)scale are intercorrelated, thus measuring the same construct | (+) Factor analyses performed on adequate sample size (7 * # items and >100) AND Cronbach’s alpha(s) calculated per dimension AND Cronbach’s alpha(s) between 0.70 and 0.95; (?) No factor analysis OR doubtful design or method (−) Cronbach’s alpha(s) 0.70 or O0.95, despite adequate design and method. (0) No information found on internal consistency. |
Reproducibility | ||
Agreement | The extent to which the scores on repeated measures are close to each other (absolute measurement error) | (+) MIC < SDC OR MIC outside the LOA OR convincing arguments that agreement is acceptable. (?) Doubtful design or method OR (MIC not defined AND no convincing arguments that agreement is acceptable) (−) MIC > SDC OR MIC equals or inside LOA, despite adequate design and method; (0) No information found on agreement. |
Reliability | The extent to which patients can be distinguished from each other, despite measurement errors (relative measurement error) | (+) ICC > 0.70 OR k > 0.70 (?) Doubtful design or method (e.g., time interval not mentioned) (−) ICC or weighted Kappa ≤0.70, despite adequate design and method (0) No information on reliability found |
Validity | ||
Content Validity | The extent to which the domain of interest is comprehensively sampled by the items in the questionnaire | (+) A clear description is provided of the measurement aim, the target population, the concepts that are being measured, and the item selection AND target population and (investigators OR experts) were involved in item selection; (?) A clear description of above-mentioned aspects is lacking OR only target population involved OR doubtful design or method; (−) No target population involvement; (0) No information found on target population involvement. |
Construct validity | The extent to which scores on a particular questionnaire relate to other measures in a manner that is consistent with theoretically derived hypotheses concerning the concepts that are being measured | (+) Specific hypotheses were formulated AND at least 75% of the results are in accordance with these hypotheses; (?)Doubtful design or method (e.g., no hypotheses); (−) Less than 75% of hypotheses were confirmed, despite adequate design and methods; (0) No information found on construct validity. |
Criterion validity (predictive or concurrent | The extent to which scores on a particular questionnaire relate to a gold standard |
C(+) correlation with standard ≥0.70 OR no statistically significant differences between the two tests found OR sensitivity and specificity ≥0.70 OR convincing arguments that gold standard is “gold” AND correlation with gold standard >0.70; (?)No convincing arguments that gold standard is “gold” OR doubtful design or method; (−) Correlation with standard <0.70 or AUC < 0.70 OR statistically significant differences between outcome measures and gold standard OR sensitivity or specificity <0.70 |
Responsiveness | The ability of a questionnaire to detect clinically important changes over time | (+) SDC or SDC < MIC OR MIC outside the LOA OR RR O 1.96 OR AUC > 0.70; (?) Doubtful design or method; (−) SDC or SDC > MIC OR MIC equals or inside LOA OR RR < 1.96 OR AUC < 0.70, despite adequate design and methods. (0)No information found on responsiveness. |
Floor and ceiling effects | The number of respondents who achieved the lowest or highest possible score | (+) ≤ 15% of the respondents achieved the highest or lowest possible score (?) Doubtful design or method (−) > 15% achieved the highest and lowest possible score despite adequate designs and methods (0) No information found on interpretation |
Interpretability | The degree to which one can assign qualitative meaning to quantitative scores | (+) Mean and SD scores presented of at least four relevant subgroups of patients and MIC defined; (?) Doubtful design or method OR less than four subgroups OR no MIC defined; (0) No information found on interpretation. |
Best evidence synthesis: levels of evidence
Results: Stage 2
Characteristics of included studies
Authors | Title | Purpose of the study | Age | Country | Sport | Test(s) | Construct measured | Properties evaluated |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Austin et al. (2013) [24] | Reliability and sensitivity of a repeated high- intensity exercise performance test for Rugby league and Rugby Union | To examine the reliability and sensitivity of 3 repeated high-intensity exercise tests (RHIE) | 24 ± 4 (Backs); 24 ± 3 (RU forwards); 24 ± 2 (RL forwards) | Australia | RL and RU | RHIE Backs test RHIE RL Forward test RHIE RU Forward test | Repeated high-intensity exercise | Reliability |
Baker (2009) [81] | Ability and validity of 3 different methods of assessing upper-body strength-endurance to distinguish playing rank in professional rugby league players | To compare the ability and validity of 3 different methods of assessing strength-endurance | Study 1 = 20.0 ± 1.2–24.9 ± 3.0 years Study 2 = 19.5 ± 1.7–25.0 ± 3.3 years | Australia | RL | BP RTF 60% 1RM BP RTF 60 kg BP RTF 102.5 kg | Upper-body strength-endurance | Validity |
Duthie et al. (2006) [99] | The reliability of ten-meter sprint time using different starting techniques | To compare the reliability of 10 m sprint times when using different starting techniques | 17 ± 0.7 years | Australia | RU | 10 m sprint test with foot start 10 m sprint test with standing start 10 m sprint test with thumb start | Speed | Reliability |
Gabbett et al. (2008) [19] | Speed, change of direction, and reactive agility of Rugby League players | To investigate the discriminative ability of speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility tests | 23.6 ± 5.3 years | Australia | RL | 5 m sprint test 10 m sprint test 505 test Modified 505 test Lrun test | Speed, Agility | Reliability, Validity |
Green et al. (2011) [6] | A valid field test protocol of linear speed and agility in Rugby Union | To investigate the reliability and construct validity of a field test protocol | 19 ± 1.67–19 ± 1.30 years | Ireland | RU | 10 m sprint test 30 m sprint test Change of direction speed | Speed, Agility | Reliability, Validity |
Holloway et al. (2008) [70] | The Tripple-120 m shuttle test: A sport-specific test for assessing anaerobic fitness in Rugby League Players | To design a sport specific test for anaerobic endurance and compare the validity of the test with the Wingate 60-s cycle test | 21.5 ± 2.15 years | Australia | RL | Tripple-120 m shuttle test | Anaerobic endurance | Validity |
Johnston and Gabbett (2011) [51] | Repeated-sprint and effort ability in Rugby League players | To assess the test-retest reliability of repeated sprint and repeated effort tests | 22.7 ± 2.2 years | Australia | RL | Repeated ability sprint test Repeated effort test | Repeated sprint ability and effort | Reliability |
Serpell et al. (2010) [74] | The development of a new test of agility for Rugby League. | To develop a reliable and valid agility test | >18 years | Australia | RL | Change of direction speed test | Agility | Reliability, Validity |
Scott et al. (2015) [68] | Reliability and usefulness of the 30–15 Intermittent fitness test in Rugby League | Examined the reliability and usefulness of the 30 Intermittent Fitness test | 15.6 ± 0.3–19.4 ± 0.5 years | Australia | RL | 30–15 Intermittent fitness test | Intermittent running ability | Reliability |
Ingebrigtsen et al. (2012) [97] | Yo-Yo IR2 testing of elite and sub-elite soccer players: Performance, heart rate response and correlations to other interval tests | To correlate the Yo-Yo Intermittent recovery test level 2 with other frequently used tests in elite soccer | 20 ± 3–26 ± 7 years | Denmark and Norway | Soccer | Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 2) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Validity |
Deprez et al. (2014) [88] | Reliability and validity of the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) in young soccer players | To investigate the test-retest reliability and construct validity from the Yo-Yo Intermittent recovery test level 1 | 12.5 ± 0.6–16.2 ± 0.6 years | Belgium | Soccer | Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Reliability, Validity |
Krustrup et al. (2003) [89] | The Yo-yo intermittent recovery test: Physiological response, reliability and validity | To examine the reproducibility and validity of the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1 | Range: 25–36 years | Denmark | Soccer | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Reliability, Validity |
Krustrup et al. (2006) [98] | The Yo-Yo IR2 test: Physiological response, reliability and application to elite soccer | To examine the physiological response and reliability of the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 2 | Range: 22–30 years | Denmark | Soccer | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 2) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Reliability |
Markovic & Mikulic (2011) [93] | Discriminative ability of the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) in prospective young soccer players | To evaluate the discriminative ability of the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test level 1 | 12.0–18.9 years | Croatia | Soccer | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Validity |
Fanchini et al. (2014) [94] | Are the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test levels 1 and 2 both useful? Reliability, responsiveness and interchangeability in young soccer players | To compare the reliability, internal responsiveness and interchangeability of the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1 | 17 ± 1 years | Italy | Soccer | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 2) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Reliability, Validity Responsiveness |
Buchheit & Rabbani (2014) [95] | The 30–15 Intermittent fitness test versus the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test level 1: relationship and sensitivity to training. | To examine the relationship between Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test and the 30–15 Intermittent Fitness test and compare the sensitivity of both tests to training | 15.4 ± 0.5 years | Iran | Soccer | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Validity, Responsiveness |
Deprez et al. (2015) [96] | The Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1 is reliable in young high-level soccer players | To investigate the test-retest reliability of the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test level 1 | 13.9 ± 0.5–18.1 ± 0.4 years | Belgium | Soccer | Yo-yo intermittent recovery test level 1 | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Reliability |
Da Silva et al. (2011) [91] | Yo-Yo IR2 and Margaria test: Validity, reliability and maximum heart rate in young soccer players | To evaluate the reliability, construct validity of the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test and of the Margaria test. | 14 ± 0.8 years | Brazil | Soccer | Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 2) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Reliability, Validity |
De Salles et al. (2012) [90] | Validity and reproducibility of the Sargent jump test in the assessment of explosive strength in soccer players | To check the validity, inter and intra-evaluators reproducibility of the Sergeant jump test. | 14.3 ± 0.66 years | Brazil | Soccer | Sargent (vertical jump) jump test | Lower-body muscular power | Reliability, Validity |
Veale et al. (2010) [92] | The Yo-yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) to discriminate elite junior Australian football players | To evaluate the discriminative validity of the Yo-yo intermittent recovery test | 16.6 ± 0.5 years | Australia | Australian football | Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 1) | Prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability | Validity |
Measurement properties and methodological quality assessments
Test | Reliability (Intra-rater, inter-rater, test-retest) and measurement error | COSMIN | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Design (interval period) |
n
| Results | Score | |
RHIE Backs test [24] | Test-retest (2 days) | 12 | Total sprint time, ICC = 0.82 (CV = 0.1–3.2%); Percentage decrement, ICC = 0.78 (CV = 4.2–49.5%) | Poor |
RHIE RL Forward test [24] | Test-retest (2 days) | 12 | Total sprint time, ICC = 0.97 (CV = 0.1–4.9%); Percentage decrement, ICC = 0.86 (CV = 1.4–48.2%) | Poor |
RHIE RU Forward test [24] | Test-retest (2 days) | 12 | Total sprint time, ICC = 0.94 (CV = 0.1–5.1%); Percentage decrement, ICC = 0.88 (CV = 0.6–35.8%) | Poor |
5 m sprint [19] | Test-retest (2 days) | 42 | Fastest time, ICC = 0.84 (% TE = 3.2) | Fair |
10 m sprint [19] | Test-retest (2 days) | 42 | Fastest time, ICC = 0.87 (%TE = 1.9) | Fair |
10 m sprint with foot start [99] | Test-retest (7 days) | 15 | ICC = 0.86 (TE% = 0.9) | Poor |
10 m sprint with standing start [99] | Test-retest (7 days) | 15 | ICC = 0.92 (TE% = 0.88) | |
10 m sprint with thumb start | Test-retest (7 days) | 15 | ICC = 0.92 (TE% = 1.00) | |
10 m sprint [6] | Test-retest (3 days) | 11 | Average sprint time, ICC = 0.88 (SEM = 0.08) | Poor |
20 m sprint [19] | Test-retest (2 days) | 42 | Fastest time, ICC = 0.96 (% TE = 1.3) | Fair |
30 m sprint [6] | Test-retest (3 days) | 11 | Average sprint time, ICC = 0.97 (SEM = 0.06) | Poor |
505 test [19] | Test-retest (2 days) | 42 | Fastest time, ICC = 0.90 (%TE = 1.9) | Fair |
Modified 505 test [19] | Test-retest (2 days) | 42 | Fastest time, ICC = 0.92 (%TE = 2.5) | Fair |
L run test [19] | Test-retest (2 days) | 42 | Fastest time, ICC = 0.95 (%TE = 2.8) | Fair |
CODS test [6] | Test-retest (3 days) | 11 | Average time, ICC = 0.87 (SEM = 0.06) | Poor |
CODS test [74] | Test-retest (7 days) | 15 | Average time, ICC = 0.87 (SEM = 0.01) | Poor |
T120S test [70] | Test-retest (4 days) | 12 | Total time taken, r = 0.74 (p = 0.006) | Poor |
20 m RSA test [51] | Test-retest (7 days) | 12 | Total sprint time, ICC = 0.96 (%TE = 1.5) | Poor |
Decrement (%), ICC = 0.91 (%TE = 22.5) | ||||
Average heart rate, ICC = 0.56 (%TE = 3.5) | ||||
Peak heart rate, ICC = 0.88 (%TE = 1.4) | ||||
Rating of perceived exertion, ICC = 0.78 (%TE = 5.5) | ||||
REA test [51] | Test-retest (7 days) | 12 | Total time, ICC = 0.82 (%TE = 2.3) | Poor |
Decrement (%), ICC = 0.91 (%TE = 6.7 | ||||
Average heart rate, ICC = 0.96 (%TE = 0.9) | ||||
Peak heart rate, ICC = 0.88 (%TE = 1.5) | ||||
Rating of perceived exertion, ICC = 0.59 (%TE = 3.3) | ||||
30–15IFT test [68] | Test-retest (9 days) | 55 | Maximal intermittent running velocity (VIFT), ICC = 0.89 (CV% = 1.9); SWC = 0.21 | Good |
13 | Heart rate, ICC = 0.96 (CV% = 0.6); SWC = 1 beats per minute | Poor | ||
Yo-Yo IR1 [88] | Test-retest (8 days) | 35 | Under 13: Total distance, ICC = 0.82 (CV% = 17.3); LoA = 0.98 ×/÷ 1.27, range = 0.77–1.24 | Poor |
32 | Under 15: Total distance, ICC = 0.85 (CV% = 16.7); LoA = 0.89 ×/÷1.30, range = 0.68–1.16 | |||
11 | Under 17: Total distance, ICC = 0.94 (CV% = 7.9); LoA = 0.94 ×/÷ 1.15, range = 0.82–1.08 | |||
Yo-Yo IR1 [89] | Test-retest (within 1 week) | 13 | Total distance, r = 0.98 (CV% = 4.9) | Poor |
Yo-Yo IR1 [94] | Test-retest (7 days) | 24 | Total distance, ICC = 0.78 (CV = 7.3%) | Poor |
Yo-Yo IR2 [94] | Test-retest (7 days) | 24 | Total distance, ICC = 0.93 (CV = 7.1%) | Poor |
Yo-Yo IR1 [96] | Test-retest (3 measurements within 1 week intervals) | 22 | Under 15: Total distance, ICC = 0.92 (CV% = 6.8–7.5); 95% ratio LoA (test 1 vs. test 2) =1.17 */÷ 1.24; 95% ratio LoA (test 2 vs. 3) = 0.96 */÷ 1.23; 95% ratio limit (test 1 vs. 3) = 1.13 */÷ 1.28. | Poor |
10 | Under 17: Total distance, ICC = 0.95 (CV% = 3.1–5.4); 95% ratio LOA (test 1 vs. test 2) = 1.09 */÷ 1.13; 95% ratio LoA (test 2 vs. 3) = 0.97 */÷ 1.09; 95% ratio LoA (test 1 vs. 3) = 1.06 */÷ 1.15. | |||
4 | Under 19: Total distance, ICC = 0.87 (CV% = 3.0–6.9); 95% ratio LoA (test 1 vs. test 2) = 1.02 */÷ 1.11; 95% ratio LoA (test 2 vs. 3) = 0.88 */÷ 1.12; 95% ratio LoA (test 1 vs 3) = 0.90 */÷ 1.22. | |||
Yo-Yo IR2 [98] | Test-retest (2 days) | 29 | Total distance, CV% = 9.6%. | Poor |
Yo-Yo IR2 [91] | Test-retest (7 days) | 18 | Total distance, ICC = 0.38 (CV% = 11) | Poor |
Vertical (Sargent) jump test [90] | Intra-rater (testing sessions separated by 2 h) | 45 | ICC = 0.99 (95% CI = 0.99–1.00) | Fair |
Inter-rater | 45 | ICC = 1.00 (95% CI = 0.99–1.00) | Fair |
Test | Validity | COSMIN | Responsiveness | COSMIN | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type |
n
| Results | Score | Design |
n
| Results | Score | |
BP RTF 60 [81] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 38 | Sign diff b/w groups NRL (36.1 ± 7.2) vs. SRL (28.0 ± 5.6) | Fair | – | – | – | – |
BP RTF 102.5 [81] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 38 | Sign diff b/w groups NRL (12.5 ± 4.3) vs. SRL (5.9 ± 3.9) | Fair | – | – | – | – |
BP RTF 60% 1RM [81] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 26 | No sign diff b/w NRL and SRL players | Poor | – | – | – | – |
5 m sprint test [19] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 42 | Sign diff b/w groups (First grade RL players vs. Second grade RL players) Effect Size = 0.68 | Fair | – | – | – | – |
10 m sprint test [19] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 42 | Sign diff b/w groups (First grade RL players vs. second grade RL players) Effect size = 0.85 | Fair | – | – | – | – |
10 m sprint test [6] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 28 | Sign diff b/w (Club RU players vs. Academy RU players) Effect size = 2.86 | Poor | – | – | – | – |
30 m sprint test [6] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 28 | Sign diff b/w (club RU players vs. Academy RU players) Effect size = 1.61 | Poor | – | – | – | – |
505 test [19] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 42 | No sign diff b/w between groups Effect size = 0.28 | Fair | – | – | – | – |
Modified 505 test [19] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 42 | No sign diff b/w groups Effect size = 0.32 | Fair | – | – | – | – |
L run [19] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 42 | No sign diff b/w groups Effect size = 0.28 | Fair | – | – | – | – |
CODS test [6] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 28 | Sign diff b/w groups. Effect size = 2.23 | Poor | – | – | – | – |
CODS test [74] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 30 | No sign diff b/w groups (Low performance group, n = 15 vs. High performance group, n = 15) | Poor | – | – | – | – |
T120S test [70] | Criterion validity | 12 | Sign corr in maximum heart rate b/w the 2 trials of T120S and W60 cycle test (r = 0.63 and 0.71). No sign corr b/w 2 trials of T120S and W60 cycle test for post 3 min lactate (r = 0.11 and 0.10). | Poor | – | – | – | – |
Yo-Yo IR2 [97] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 51 | Sign diff b/w elite vs. sub-elite soccer players. | Poor | – | – | – | – |
Hypothesis testing (convergent validity) | 12 39 | Sign corr b/w Yo-Yo IR2 and Yo-Yo IR1 (r = 0.74, p < 0.01) for the elite players. Sign corr b/w Yo-Yo IR2 and Yo-Yo IR1 (r = 0.76, p < 0.01) for sub-elite players. | Poor | |||||
Hypothesis testing (convergent validity) | 12 39 | Sign corr b/w Yo-Yo IR2 and 35 m repeated sprint ability test (r = −0.74, p < 0.01) for elite players. Moderate corr observed for sub-elite (r = −0.34, p < 0.05) | Poor | |||||
Criterion validity | 13 12 | Moderate corr for sub-elite players b/w Yo-Yo IR2 and treadmill test (r = 0.48, p < 0.01). No significant corr for the elite players (r = 0.59, p < 0.10) | Poor | |||||
Yo-Yo IR1 [97] | Hypothesis testing (Known group validity) | 51 | Sign diff b/w elite (n = 12) vs. sub-elite (n = 39) soccer players | Poor | – | – | – | – |
Hypothesis testing (convergent validity) | 12 39 | Very large corr b/w Yo-Yo IR1 and 35 m repeated sprint time (r = −0.80, p < 0.01) for elite players (n = 12). Large corr b/w Yo-Yo IR1 and 35 m repeated sprint time (r = −0.51, p < 0.05) for sub-elite players (n = 39) | Poor | |||||
Criterion validity | 12 39 | Very large corr. b/w Yo-Yo IR1 and VO2MAX for elite players (r = 0.76, p < 0.01). Very large corr b/w Yo-Yo IR1 and VO2MAX for sub-elite players (r = 0.73, p < 0.01). | Poor | |||||
Yo-yo IRT1 [92] | Hypotheses testing (Known group validity) | 60 | Sign diff b/w groups (P < 0.001). *ES = 3.78 elite Australian rules football (n = 20) vs. healthy group (n = 20). | Poor | – | – | – | – |
Yo-yo IRT1 [88] | Hypotheses testing (Known group validity) | 208 | Sign diff b/w groups (p < 0.001) ES = 0.94 (90% CI = 0.46–1.43) b/w U15 Elite vs. Sub-elite | Poor | – | – | – | – |
Yo-yo IRT1 [89] | Hypotheses testing (Convergent validity) | 22 | Sign corr b/w Yo-yo test performances and fitness performances during soccer match assessed using time motion analysis (r = 0.53–0.71, p < 0.05) | Poor | Repeated measures, 4 testing sessions [pre-preparation, mid preparation, start season, end season] | 10 | Sign diff in Yo-yo mean distance covered between preseason measures and seasonal measures (p < 0.05) Sign diff in heart rate measures b/w preseason and seasonal measures (p < 0.05) | Poor |
Criterion validity | 17 | Sign corr b/w Yo-yo test performances and time to fatigue (r = 0.79, p < 0.05) and maximal oxygen uptake (r = 0.71, p < 0.05) | ||||||
Yo-Yo IRT1 [93] | Hypotheses testing (Known group validity) | 106 | Sign group differences in YY IRT1 among age categories (F = 25.3; p < 0.001). *ES = 4.17 (U 13 vs. U 19) p < 0.01 | Poor | – | – | – | – |
Yo-Yo IRT1 [94] | Hypotheses testing (Convergent validity) | 24 | Sign corr b/w Yo-Yo IRT1 and Yo-Yo IRT2 (r = 0.56–0.84) | – | Repeated measures [(3 testing sessions of Yo-yo IRT1 before 11 wks of training + matches and 2 testing sessions post training + matches] | 24 | ES = 0.9 (90%CI = 0.66–1.18); SWC = 3.7%; MDC = 20.2%; % changes after training = 14.5%; Probability of substantial changes btwn pre-and post-measures = 99.9% | Poor |
Yo-Yo IRT2 [94] | Hypotheses testing (Convergent validity) | 24 | Sign corr b/w Yo-Yo IRT1 and Yo-Yo IRT2 (r = 0.56–0.84). | poor | Repeated measures [(3 testing sessions of Yo-yo IRT2 before 11 wks of training + matches and 2 testing sessions post training + matches] | 24 | ES = 0.4 (90%CI = 0.17–0.69); SWC = 4.8%; MDC = 19.5%; | |
Yo-Yo IR1 [95] | Hypotheses testing (Convergent validity) | 14 | Large corr b/n Yo-yo IRT1 and 30–15 IFT (r = 0.75, 90%CI = 0.57–0.86) | Poor | Pre and post measures interspaced by an 8-week training intervention | 14 | Within-test % changes = +35% (90% CI = 24–45) for Yo-yo IRT1 vs. +7% (90% CI = 4–10) for 30–15 IFT ES for the changes (standardised differences): Yo-yo IRT1 = 1.2 vs. 1.1 for 30–15 IFT | Poor |
Yo-Yo IRT2 [98] | Criterion validity | 13 | A sign corr b/w Yo-yo IR2 and time to fatigue in the incremental running test (r = 0.74, p < 0.05) | Poor | ||||
Yo-Yo IRT2 [91] | Hypotheses testing (Concurrent validity) | 18 | High positive corr found b/w Yo-Yo IRT2 and PRT >85% MHR during the match (r = 0.71, p = 0.001) | Poor | – | – | – | |
Vertical (Sargent) jump test [90] | Criterion validity | 45 | ICC = 0.99 (95% CI = 0.97–1.00) p = 0.001 | Fair | – | – | – |
Test | Reliability | Construct validity | Criterion | Responsiveness | Interpretability | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Intra | Inter | Test- retest | Known group | Convergent/Concurrent | ||||
BP RTF 60 [81] | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BP RTF 102.5 [81] | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
30–15IFT [68] | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
5 m sprint test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
10 m sprint test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
20 m sprint test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
505 test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Modified 505 test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Lrun test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Sargent (vertical) jump test [90] | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | ? | 0 | 0 |
Yo-Yo intermittent recovery level 1 (Yo-Yo IR1) test
Yo-Yo intermittent recovery level 2 (Yo-Yo IR2) test
Speed tests
Repeated-sprint ability (RSA) test
Repeated-effort ability (REA) test
Repeated high-intensity exercise (RHIE) tests
30–15 intermittent fitness test (30–15 IFT)
Triple 120-m shuttle test (T120S)
Agility/change of direction speed tests
Sergeant (vertical) jump test
Bench press repetitions-to-fatigue tests
Best evidence synthesis: level of evidence
Test | Reliability | Hypothesis testing | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Inter | Intra | Test-retest | Known group | Convergent | Criterion | Responsiveness | |
5 m sprint test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 |
10 m sprint test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 |
20 m sprint test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 |
505 test [19] | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Modified 505 [19] | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Lrun [19] | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Sargent jump test [90] | + | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 |
BP RTF 60 [81] | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BP RTF 102.5 [81] | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 |
30–15IFT [68] | 0 | 0 | ++ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |