Centre for Exercise and Sports Sciences, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood Campus, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, Melbourne, VIC, 3125, Australia,
Sports Med. 2014 Apr;44(4):501-18. doi: 10.1007/s40279-013-0131-0.
A high level of participant skill is influential in determining the outcome of many sports. Thus, tests assessing skill outcomes in sport are commonly used by coaches and researchers to estimate an athlete's ability level, to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions or for the purpose of talent identification.
The objective of this systematic review was to examine the methodological quality, measurement properties and feasibility characteristics of sporting skill outcome tests reported in the peer-reviewed literature.
A search of both SPORTDiscus and MEDLINE databases was undertaken.
Studies that examined tests of sporting skill outcomes were reviewed. Only studies that investigated measurement properties of the test (reliability or validity) were included. A total of 22 studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.
A customised checklist of assessment criteria, based on previous research, was utilised for the purpose of this review.
A range of sports were the subject of the 22 studies included in this review, with considerations relating to methodological quality being generally well addressed by authors. A range of methods and statistical procedures were used by researchers to determine the measurement properties of their skill outcome tests. The majority (95%) of the reviewed studies investigated test-retest reliability, and where relevant, inter and intra-rater reliability was also determined. Content validity was examined in 68% of the studies, with most tests investigating multiple skill domains relevant to the sport. Only 18% of studies assessed all three reviewed forms of validity (content, construct and criterion), with just 14% investigating the predictive validity of the test. Test responsiveness was reported in only 9% of studies, whilst feasibility received varying levels of attention.
In organised sport, further tests may exist which have not been investigated in this review. This could be due to such tests firstly not being published in the peer-review literature and secondly, not having their measurement properties (i.e., reliability or validity) examined formally.
Of the 22 studies included in this review, items relating to test methodological quality were, on the whole, well addressed. Test-retest reliability was determined in all but one of the reviewed studies, whilst most studies investigated at least two aspects of validity (i.e., content, construct or criterion-related validity). Few studies examined predictive validity or responsiveness. While feasibility was addressed in over half of the studies, practicality and test limitations were rarely addressed. Consideration of study quality, measurement properties and feasibility components assessed in this review can assist future researchers when developing or modifying tests of sporting skill outcomes.
参与者的技能水平在很大程度上影响着许多运动项目的结果。因此，教练和研究人员通常使用评估运动技能结果的测试来估计运动员的能力水平，评估干预措施的效果，或用于发现人才。
本系统评价旨在检查同行评议文献中报告的运动技能测试的方法学质量、测量特性和可行性特征。
对 SPORTDiscus 和 MEDLINE 数据库进行了搜索。
对运动技能测试的研究进行了审查。仅纳入了调查测试测量特性（可靠性或有效性）的研究。共有 22 项研究符合纳入/排除标准。
使用了基于先前研究的定制评估标准清单来进行本综述。
本综述纳入的 22 项研究涉及多种运动，作者普遍很好地考虑了方法学质量。研究人员使用了多种方法和统计程序来确定其技能测试的测量特性。大多数（95%）研究调查了重测信度，在相关情况下，还确定了内部和内部评分者信度。68%的研究检查了内容效度，大多数测试调查了与运动相关的多个技能领域。只有 18%的研究评估了所有三种已审查的有效性形式（内容、结构和标准），只有 14%研究了测试的预测有效性。只有 9%的研究报告了测试的反应性，而可行性则受到不同程度的关注。
在有组织的运动中，可能存在尚未在本综述中调查的进一步测试。这可能是由于这些测试首先没有在同行评审文献中发表，其次，它们的测量特性（即可靠性或有效性）没有正式进行检查。
在本综述中纳入的 22 项研究中，与测试方法学质量相关的项目总体上得到了很好的处理。除一项研究外，所有研究均确定了重测信度，而大多数研究至少调查了有效性的两个方面（即内容、结构或标准相关有效性）。很少有研究调查预测有效性或反应性。虽然超过一半的研究都考虑了可行性，但很少有研究涉及实用性和测试局限性。考虑本综述中评估的研究质量、测量特性和可行性因素可以帮助未来的研究人员在开发或修改运动技能测试时提供参考。
