Clemente Filipe Manuel, Ramirez-Campillo Rodrigo, Beato Marco, Moran Jason, Kawczynski Adam, Makar Piotr, Sarmento Hugo, Afonso José
Escola Superior Desporto e Lazer, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, Rua Escola Industrial e Comercial de Nun'Álvares, 4900-347 Viana do Castelo, Portugal.
Instituto de Telecomunicações, Delegação da Covilhã, Lisboa 1049-001, Portugal.
Biol Sport. 2023 Jul;40(3):919-943. doi: 10.5114/biolsport.2023.122480. Epub 2023 Feb 1.
The aims of this scoping review were (i) to characterize the main methodological approaches to assessing individualized running speed thresholds in team sports players; (ii) to assess the use of traditional arbitrary (absolute) thresholds compared to individualized running speed thresholds in team sports players; (iii) to provide an evidence gap map (EGM) about the approaches and study designs employed in investigations in team sports and (iv) to provide directions for future research and practical applications for the strength and conditioning field. Methods studies were searched for in the following databases: (i) PubMed; (ii) Scopus; (iii) SPORTDiscus and (iv) Web of Science. The search was conducted on 15/07/2022. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies (RoBANS). From 3,195 potentially relevant articles, 36 were eligible for inclusion in this review. Of the 36 included articles, 27 (75%) focused on the use of arbitrary and individualized running speed thresholds to describe the locomotor demands (e.g., high intensity running) of players. Thirty-four articles used individualized speed running thresholds based on physical fitness assessments (e.g., 40-m linear sprint) or physical performance (e.g., maximal acceleration). This scoping review supported the need for a greater focus to be placed on improving the methodological aspects of using individualized speed running thresholds in team sports. More than just creating alternatives to arbitrary thresholds, it is essential to increase the replicability of methodological conditions whilst ensuring that research comparing the most adequate measures and approaches to individualization takes into consideration the population and context of each study.
（i）描述评估团队运动运动员个性化跑步速度阈值的主要方法；（ii）评估团队运动运动员中传统任意（绝对）阈值与个性化跑步速度阈值的使用情况；（iii）提供关于团队运动研究中所采用方法和研究设计的证据差距图（EGM）；（iv）为力量与体能训练领域的未来研究和实际应用提供指导。在以下数据库中检索方法学研究：（i）PubMed；（ii）Scopus；（iii）SPORTDiscus；（iv）科学网。检索于2022年7月15日进行。使用非随机研究偏倚风险评估工具（RoBANS）评估偏倚风险。在3195篇潜在相关文章中，36篇符合纳入本综述的条件。在纳入的36篇文章中，27篇（75%）关注使用任意和个性化跑步速度阈值来描述运动员的运动需求（如高强度跑步）。34篇文章使用基于体能评估（如40米直线冲刺）或身体表现（如最大加速度）的个性化速度跑步阈值。本范围综述支持需要更加关注改善团队运动中使用个性化速度跑步阈值的方法学方面。不仅仅是创建任意阈值的替代方法，在确保比较最适当的个体化测量方法和途径的研究考虑到每项研究的人群和背景的同时，提高方法学条件的可重复性至关重要。
