Maximal strength measurement: A critical evaluation of common methods—a narrative review

Research output: Journal contributionsScientific review articlesResearch

Authors

Measuring maximal strength (MSt) is a very common performance diagnoses, especially in elite and competitive sports. The most popular procedure in test batteries is to test the one repetition maximum (1RM). Since testing maximum dynamic strength is very time consuming, it often suggested to use isometric testing conditions instead. This suggestion is based on the assumption that the high Pearson correlation coefficients of r ≥ 0.7 between isometric and dynamic conditions indicate that both tests would provide similar measures of MSt. However, calculating r provides information about the relationship between two parameters, but does not provide any statement about the agreement or concordance of two testing procedures. Hence, to assess replaceability, the concordance correlation coefficient (ρc) and the Bland-Altman analysis including the mean absolute error (MAE) and the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) seem to be more appropriate. Therefore, an exemplary model based on r = 0.55 showed ρc = 0.53, A MAE of 413.58 N and a MAPE = 23.6% with a range of −1,000–800 N within 95% Confidence interval (95%CI), while r = 0.7 and 0.92 showed ρc = 0.68 with a MAE = 304.51N/MAPE = 17.4% with a range of −750 N–600 N within a 95% CI and ρc = 0.9 with a MAE = 139.99/MAPE = 7.1% with a range of −200–450 N within a 95% CI, respectively. This model illustrates the limited validity of correlation coefficients to evaluate the replaceability of two testing procedures. Interpretation and classification of ρc, MAE and MAPE seem to depend on expected changes of the measured parameter. A MAPE of about 17% between two testing procedures can be assumed to be intolerably high.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1105201
JournalFrontiers in Sports and Active Living
Volume5
Number of pages11
ISSN2642-9367
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 17.02.2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
2023 Warneke, Wagner, Keiner, Hillebrecht, Schiemann, Behm, Wallot and Wirth.

Documents

DOI

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Reconsidering adaptation as translation
  2. Differences in adaptation to light and temperature extremes of Chlorella sorokiniana strains isolated from a wastewater lagoon
  3. Omega
  4. When one size does not fit all
  5. Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the Forming Zone in Dieless Wire Drawing Process of Thin Biometallic Wires
  6. Notting Hill Gate 6 - Basic
  7. What is the ‘problem’ of gender inequality represented to be in the Swedish forest sector?
  8. Understanding of capacity in 3rd grade
  9. Adapting and evolving-learning place cooperation in change
  10. Architecture of an adaptive, human-centered assistance system
  11. How stable are visions for protected area management? Stakeholder perspectives before and during a pandemic
  12. Impact of high carbon amendments and pre-crops on soil bacterial communities
  13. Incentives under hybrid activity-based costing systems
  14. The complementarity of single-species and ecosystem-oriented research in conservation research
  15. Effects of grade retention on achievement and self-concept in science and mathematics
  16. Political Representation in the EU
  17. Umweltrechtsschutz in China
  18. Multimodality in Strategy-as-Practice Research
  19. Dynamicland
  20. ORCHIDEE-SOM
  21. Motivation revisited
  22. What do we do with "other" music?
  23. From Making to Displaying: The Role of Organizational Space in Showing Creative Coolness at the Volkshotel
  24. The Role of Assessment and Quality Management in Transformations towards Sustainable Development
  25. Consequence evaluations and moral concerns about climate change
  26. A Glue from Snail Slime?!