Using the VERT wearable device to monitor jumping loads in elite volleyball athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport is becoming increasingly competitive and athletes are being exposed to greater physical demands, leaving them prone to injuries. Monitoring athletes with the use of wearable technology could provide a way to potentially manage training and competition loads and reduce injuries. One such technology is the VERT inertial measurement unit, a commercially available discrete wearable device containing a 3-axis accelerometer, 3-axis gyroscope and 3-axis magnetometer. Some of the main measurement outputs include jump count, jump height and landing impacts. While several studies have examined the accuracy of the VERT's measures of jump height and jump count, landing impact force has not yet been investigated. The objective of this research study was to explore the validity of the VERT landing impact values. We hypothesized that the absolute peak VERT acceleration values during a jump-land cycle would fall within 10% of the peak acceleration values derived simultaneously from a research-grade accelerometer (Shimmer). Fourteen elite university-level volleyball players each performed 10 jumps while wearing both devices simultaneously. The results showed that VERT peak accelerations were variable (limits of agreement of -84.13% and 52.37%) and had a propensity to be lower (mean bias of -15.88%) when compared to the Shimmer. In conclusion, the validity of the VERT device's landing impact values are generally poor, when compared to the Shimmer.
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) | 0.000 | 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".