4.4 Article

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF TESTS TO ASSESS LOWER-BODY MUSCULAR POWER IN CHILDREN

Journal

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
Volume 29, Issue 8, Pages 2277-2285

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000864

Keywords

fitness; field tests; criterion-related validity; reproducibility; standing long jump; children

Categories

Funding

  1. Junta de Andalucia (BOJA) [47]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fernandez-Santos, JR, Ruiz, JR, Cohen, DD, Gonzalez-Montesinos, JL, and Castro-Pinero, J. Reliability and validity of tests to assess lower body muscular power in children. J Strength Cond Res 29(8): 2277-2285, 2015The purpose of this study was to analyze the reliability and the criterion-related validity of several lower-body muscular power tests (i.e., standing long jump [SLJ], squat jump, countermovement jump, and Abalakov jump) in children aged 6-12 years. Three hundred sixty three healthy children (168 girls) agreed to participate in this study. All the lower-body muscular power tests were performed twice (7 days apart), whereas the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) leg extension test was performed 2 days after the first session of testing. All the tests showed a high reliability (intertrial difference close to 0 and no significant differences between trials, all p > 0.05). The association between the lower-body muscular power tests and 1RM leg extension test was high (all p < 0.001). The SLJ and the Abalakov jump tests showed the highest association with 1RM leg extension test (R-2 = 0.700, test result, weight, height, sex, and age were added in the model). The SLJ test can be a useful tool to assess lower-body muscular power in children when laboratory methods are not feasible because it is practical, time efficient, and low in cost and equipment requirements.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available