Comparison Of Interrater Reliabililty Between Lower Quarter Y Balance Test And The Single Leg Squat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both the Y Balance Test (YBT) and the Single Leg Squat (SLS) are pre-training functional test that are used to assess physical performance, both have been shown to be valid and reliable. However, it is unclear which is the most reliable between the two. PURPOSE: To test the interrater reliability of the YBT and the SLS, and to examine which is a more reliable pre-training test. METHODS: The YBT and the SLS squat were performed by 16 (N=16, mean age M=19.313, SD ± 1.35; Freshman=8, Sophomore=5, Junior=1, Senior=2) male, NAIA collegiate baseball players. Each participant first performed the YBT which was scored simultaneously by 4 skilled raters. Directly following, each participant was recorded with a digital video camera performing the SLS. Each rater later viewed the video independently and scored the SLS. RESULTS: The SLS showed to have an acceptable (R2=.641; F(15, 45)=4.23, p=.00) interrater reliability between the 4 raters, whereas the YBT showed to have a good (R2=.895; F(15, 45)=9.62, p=.00) interrater reliability. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the YBT to be a reliable test; it also showed the YBT to have a higher interrater reliability than the SLS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".