Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (4) (remove)
Document Type
Conference Type
- Konferenz-Abstract (1)
- Konferenz-Poster (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- Sportmedizin (1)
- Sports Injury (1)
- biomechanics (1)
- inertial sensor (1)
- locomotion (1)
- non linear time-series analysis (1)
Institute
Open Access
- Open Access (3)
- Bronze (1)
- Closed (1)
- Gold (1)
- Hybrid (1)
Appraising the Methodological Quality of Sports Injury Video Analysis Studies: The QA-SIVAS Scale
(2023)
Background
Video analysis (VA) is commonly used in the assessment of sports injuries and has received considerable research interest. Until now, no tool has been available for the assessment of study quality. Therefore, the objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a valid instrument that reliably assesses the methodological quality of VA studies.
Methods
The Quality Appraisal for Sports Injury Video Analysis Studies (QA-SIVAS) scale was developed using a modified Delphi approach including expert consensus and pilot testing. Reliability was examined through intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC3,1) and free-marginal kappa statistics by three independent raters. Construct validity was investigated by comparing QA-SIVAS with expert ratings by using Kendall’s tau analysis. Rating time was studied by applying the scale to 21 studies and computing the mean time for rating per study article.
Results
The QA-SIVAS scale consists of an 18-item checklist addressing the study design, data source, conduct, report, and discussion of VA studies in sports injury research. Inter- and intra-rater reliability were excellent with ICCs > 0.97. Expert ratings revealed a high construct validity (0.71; p < 0.001). Mean rating time was 10 ± 2 min per article.
Conclusion
QA-SIVAS is a reliable and valid instrument that can be easily applied to sports injury research. Future studies in the field of VA should adhere to standardized methodological criteria and strict quality guidelines.
Running stability is the ability to withstand naturally occurring minor perturbations during running. It is susceptible to external and internal running conditions such as footwear or fatigue. However, both its reliable measurability and the extent to which laboratory measurements reflect outdoor running remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the intra- and inter-day reliability of the running stability as well as the comparability of different laboratory and outdoor conditions. Competitive runners completed runs on a motorized treadmill in a research laboratory and overground both indoors and outdoors. Running stability was determined as the maximum short-term divergence exponent from the raw gyroscope signals of wearable sensors mounted to four different body locations (sternum, sacrum, tibia, and foot). Sacrum sensor measurements demonstrated the highest reliabilities (good to excellent; ICC = 0.85 to 0.91), while those of the tibia measurements showed the lowest (moderate to good; ICC = 0.55 to 0.89). Treadmill measurements depicted systematically lower values than both overground conditions for all sensor locations (relative bias = -9.8% to -2.9%). The two overground conditions, however, showed high agreement (relative bias = -0.3% to 0.5%; relative limits of agreement = 9.2% to 15.4%). Our results imply moderate to excellent reliability for both overground and treadmill running, which is the foundation of further research on running stability.