Using Portable Force Plates to Assess Vertical Jump Performance: A Metrological Appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to verify the metrological properties of portable force plates that are used to assess countermovement jump performance. While 88 participants (38 males, 50 females) were included in the agreement analyses, 84 participants (37 males and 47 females) completed the reliability part of the study. This randomized crossover design suggests that portable force plates could be used interchangeably with a reference system. Indeed, the differences between both devices were all considered trivial (effect size (ES) < 0.20), and the mean bias was never greater than 3.41% in comparison to the reference system. In addition, the absolute and relative reliability parameters were found to be acceptable for clinical use, even when used on different floor surfaces. However, it was found that the ratio between flight time and contraction time (FTCT) showed questionable reliability when tests were conducted on different surfaces (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.49; coefficient of variation = 26.72%). Therefore, practitioners should be careful when installing the portable device on different floor surfaces in order to optimize the reliability and the ability to detect real change in the context of a countermovement jump monitoring process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".