MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006380315 · doi:10.2478/hukin-2019-0081

Taekwondo Anaerobic Intermittent Kick Test: Discriminant Validity and an Update with the Gold-Standard Wingate Test

2020· article· en· W3006380315 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Kinetics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWingate testAnaerobic exerciseJumpingTest (biology)AthletesPhysical therapySprintConstruct validityVertical jumpMedicineMulti-stage fitness testJumpPhysical fitnessClinical psychologyPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to update the validity of the Taekwondo Anaerobic Intermittent Kick Test compared with the 30-s Wingate anaerobic test as the "Gold-Standard", squat jump and countermovement jump tests. The second objective was to examine whether this new specific test would be able to effectively discriminate between elite taekwondo athletes of different competitive levels. Twenty taekwondo athletes (15 males and 5 females) participated in the validation component, whereas 18 (14 males and 4 females) and 16 (13 males and 3 females) athletes participated in the reliability analysis of the Wingate anaerobic test and jumping tests, respectively. They performed these tests on two separate occasions (i.e., test-retest), in addition to the Taekwondo Anaerobic Intermittent Kick Test. To establish test's discriminatory capability (i.e., construct validity), two subgroups were identified based on their international and national taekwondo performance: 10 elite (8 males and 2 females) and 9 sub-elite (7 males and 2 females) athletes. Wingate anaerobic test and jumping tests performances showed excellent reliability (ICC > 0.90, SEM < 5% for most variables). Significant correlations between Taekwondo Anaerobic Intermittent Kick Test, Wingate anaerobic test, and jumping tests' variables were mostly "large". Elite taekwondo athletes showed greater taekwondo test performances compared with their sub-elite counterparts (p < 0.001). Receiving operating characteristic analysis indicated that the taekwondo specific test was able to effectively discriminate between elite and sub-elite taekwondo athletes. Overall, the findings of the current study support the concurrent validity of the Taekwondo Anaerobic Intermittent Kick Test. In particular, the Taekwondo Anaerobic Intermittent Kick Test showed good ability to effectively discriminate between taekwondo athletes of different competitive levels.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it