| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 965.59 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
A validação de procedimentos de avaliação física em regime online é crucial para
garantir a sua eficácia em comparação com os métodos presenciais. Assim, este estudo
teve como objetivo analisar a validade e fiabilidade entre avaliadores na avaliação de
componentes da aptidão física através de uma bateria de testes supervisionada em
regime online. Trinta e um estudantes de Ciências do Desporto participaram no estudo.
A bateria de testes foi supervisionada por um avaliador em regime online, enquanto a
recolha de dados foi simultaneamente efetuada pelo supervisor em regime online e por
um avaliador em regime presencial (este último sem qualquer influência na realização
dos testes). A bateria de avaliação contemplou os seguintes testes: i) agachamento com
bastão, ii) levantar e sentar na cadeira cinco vezes, iii) levantar e sentar na cadeira
durante 30 segundos, iv) flexões com joelhos no chão e v) teste de step de 2 minutos.
Regressões lineares (r²) analisaram a validade entre avaliadores. Por outro lado, o
coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (CCI) e o coeficiente de variação (CV) analisaram a
fiabilidade entre avaliadores, enquanto os gráficos Bland-Altman analisaram a
reprodutibilidade entre duas medições. Os resultados indicaram que os valores do r²
variaram entre 0.76 e 0.99, o que indica uma elevada validade concorrente entre
avaliadores. Além disso, os valores do CCI e CV indicaram excelente fiabilidade em
todos os testes (CCI > 0.90 e CV < 10%). Por fim, os gráficos Bland-Altman indicaram
pouca variabilidade entre avaliações (online vs. presencial), dado que os vieses se
encontraram perto do zero em todos os testes (variação de -0.29 a 0.42). Os resultados
deste estudo sustentam a validade e fiabilidade entre avaliadores na avaliação de
componentes da aptidão física através de uma bateria de testes administrada e
supervisionada em regime online.
The validation of online physical assessment procedures is crucial to ensure their effectiveness compared to in-person methods. Thus, this study aimed to analyze the validity and reliability between raters in assessing physical fitness components through an online supervised test battery. Thirty-one Sport Science students participated in the study. An online evaluator supervised the battery of tests, while data collection was carried out simultaneously by the online supervisor and an in-person evaluator (the latter without any influence on the performance of the tests). The assessment battery included the following tests: i) squats with a stick, ii) five-repetition sit-to-stand, iii) 30- second chair stand test, iv) push-ups with knees on the floor, and v) 2-minute step test. Linear regressions (r²) analysed inter-rater validity. On the other hand, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) analysed inter-rater reliability, while Bland-Altman plots analysed reproducibility between two measurements. The results indicated that r² values ranged from 0.76 to 0.99, which means high concurrent validity between raters. Furthermore, the ICC and CV values indicated excellent reliability in all tests (ICC > 0.90 and CV < 10%). Finally, BlandAltman plots indicated little variability between assessments (online vs. in-person), given that biases were close to zero in all tests (ranging from -0.29 to 0.42). The results of this study support the validity and reliability interrater of assessing physical fitness components through a test battery administered and supervised online.
The validation of online physical assessment procedures is crucial to ensure their effectiveness compared to in-person methods. Thus, this study aimed to analyze the validity and reliability between raters in assessing physical fitness components through an online supervised test battery. Thirty-one Sport Science students participated in the study. An online evaluator supervised the battery of tests, while data collection was carried out simultaneously by the online supervisor and an in-person evaluator (the latter without any influence on the performance of the tests). The assessment battery included the following tests: i) squats with a stick, ii) five-repetition sit-to-stand, iii) 30- second chair stand test, iv) push-ups with knees on the floor, and v) 2-minute step test. Linear regressions (r²) analysed inter-rater validity. On the other hand, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) analysed inter-rater reliability, while Bland-Altman plots analysed reproducibility between two measurements. The results indicated that r² values ranged from 0.76 to 0.99, which means high concurrent validity between raters. Furthermore, the ICC and CV values indicated excellent reliability in all tests (ICC > 0.90 and CV < 10%). Finally, BlandAltman plots indicated little variability between assessments (online vs. in-person), given that biases were close to zero in all tests (ranging from -0.29 to 0.42). The results of this study support the validity and reliability interrater of assessing physical fitness components through a test battery administered and supervised online.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Aptidão Física Avaliação Online Bateria de Testes Reprodutibilidade Sedentarismo
