Chacón-Moscoso Salvador, Sanduvete-Chaves Susana, Anguera M Teresa, Losada José L, Portell Mariona, Lozano-Lozano José A
HUM-649 Innovaciones Metodológicas en Evaluación de Programas, Departamento de Psicología Experimental, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Departamento de Psicología, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 8;9:291. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00291. eCollection 2018.
Observational studies are based on systematic observation, understood as an organized recording and quantification of behavior in its natural context. Applied to the specific area of sports, observational studies present advantages when comparing studies based on other designs, such as the flexibility for adapting to different contexts and the possibility of using non-standardized instruments as well as a high degree of development in specific software and data analysis. Although the importance and usefulness of sports-related observational studies have been widely shown, there is no checklist to report these studies. Consequently, authors do not have a guide to follow in order to include all of the important elements in an observational study in sports areas, and reviewers do not have a reference tool for assessing this type of work. To resolve these issues, this article aims to develop a checklist to measure the quality of sports-related observational studies based on a content validity study. The participants were 22 judges with at least 3 years of experience in observational studies, sports areas, and methodology. They evaluated a list of 60 items systematically selected and classified into 12 dimensions. They were asked to score four aspects of each item on 5-point Likert scales to measure the following dimensions: representativeness, relevance, utility, and feasibility. The judges also had an open-format section for comments. The Osterlind index was calculated for each item and for each of the four aspects. Items were considered appropriate when obtaining a score of at least 0.5 in the four assessed aspects. After considering these inclusion criteria and all of the open-format comments, the resultant checklist consisted of 54 items grouped into the same initial 12 dimensions. Finally, we highlight the strengths of this work. We also present its main limitation: the need to apply the resultant checklist to obtain data and, thus, increase quality indicators of its psychometric properties. For this reason, as relevant actions for further development, we encourage expert readers to use it and provide feedback; we plan to apply it to different sport areas.
观察性研究基于系统观察，即对自然情境下行为的有组织记录和量化。应用于体育特定领域时，与基于其他设计的研究相比，观察性研究具有优势，比如适应不同情境的灵活性、使用非标准化工具的可能性，以及特定软件和数据分析方面的高度发展。尽管与体育相关的观察性研究的重要性和实用性已得到广泛证明，但尚无报告此类研究的清单。因此，作者在将体育领域观察性研究的所有重要要素纳入研究时没有可循的指南，审稿人也没有评估这类工作的参考工具。为解决这些问题，本文旨在基于内容效度研究制定一份清单，以衡量与体育相关的观察性研究的质量。参与者为22名在观察性研究、体育领域和方法学方面至少有3年经验的评委。他们对系统挑选并归类为12个维度的60个项目清单进行了评估。要求他们用5点李克特量表对每个项目的四个方面进行评分，以衡量以下维度：代表性、相关性、实用性和可行性。评委们还有一个开放式的评论部分。计算每个项目以及四个方面各自的奥斯特林德指数。当四个评估方面的得分至少为0.5时，项目被认为是合适的。在考虑这些纳入标准和所有开放式评论后，最终的清单由54个项目组成，分为相同的初始12个维度。最后，我们强调了这项工作的优势。我们也指出了其主要局限性：需要应用最终的清单来获取数据，从而提高其心理测量特性的质量指标。因此，作为进一步发展的相关行动，我们鼓励专业读者使用它并提供反馈；我们计划将其应用于不同的体育领域。
