MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Ecological Validity Of Countermovement Jump Force Plate-derived Asymmetry Metrics To On-court Basketball Asymmetry

2022· article· en· W4294843535 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua A.J. Keogh, Zaryan Masood, Dylan Kobsar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCountermovementAsymmetryForce platformJumpMathematicsAnklePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAccelerometerTeam sportBasketballPhysical therapyOrthodonticsPsychologyMedicineComputer scienceAthletesPhysicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To assess the ecological validity of inter-limb asymmetry metrics obtained from countermovement jump (CMJ) testing compared to the impact asymmetry observed on-court. METHODS: Ten varsity female basketball athletes (age 19.8 (1.8) years, height 175.8 (7.7) cm, mass 73.5 (12.8) kg, and training experience 3.1 (1.6) years at the university level) from McMaster University who were free from any musculoskeletal injury were recruited to participate in the 3-week study. A standardized 5-minute dynamic warm up was completed prior to CMJ testing. Participants completed 3 maximal attempts with a minimum of 60 seconds rest between successive attempts on two portable force plates. The independent variables obtained from the CMJ testing included: peak and average braking, propulsive, and landing force asymmetry, as well as braking, propulsive, and landing impulse asymmetry, and average braking rate of force development asymmetry. Following CMJ testing, participants were provided with wearable inertial measurement units to capture on-court impact (e.g., overall session impact asymmetry, which was further stratified into: low (1-5 g), medium (6-20 g), and high (21-200 + g) impact bins) during 90-minute training sessions. The sensors were positioned bilaterally on each ankle anterosuperiorly relative to the medial malleoli. Multiple linear regressions were used to determine the ecological validity of the CMJ metrics as predictors of the on-court asymmetry metrics, at an alpha level of 0.05. RESULTS: All braking, propulsive, and landing asymmetry variables derived from the force plate were not significantly predictive of on-court overall session impact asymmetry (R2 = 0.39; F = 1.13; p-value = 0.39; and estimate of error variance = 33.20). Furthermore, there were no significant CMJ predictors when stratifying impact asymmetry into low, medium, and high acceleration bins (R2 = 0.40, 0.47, and 0.44; p-value = 0.36, 0.18, and 0.25, respectively). CONCLUSION: CMJ force plate testing appears to measure unique aspects of inter-limb asymmetry as compared to what is observed on-court. Thus, CMJ testing alone may not provide an adequate representation of the asymmetrical loading patterns that may be experienced by athletes in their normal training environment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicSports injuries and prevention→French-language works237,207→