PubMed · 9854563
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
P Laws, N Purser, D Williams. 1998. The Stresst'er ergometer.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1078-5884(98)80019-1
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The reliability of power in tests of physical performance affects the precision of assessment of athletes, patients, clients and study participants. In this meta-analytic review we identify the most reliable measures of power and the factors affecting reliability. Our measures of reliability were the typical (standard) error of measurement expressed as a coefficient of variation (CV) and the percent change in the mean between trials. We meta-analysed these measures for power or work from 101 studies of healthy adults. Measures and tests with the smallest CV in exercise of a given duration include field tests of sprint running (approximately 0.9%), peak power in an incremental test on a treadmill or cycle ergometer (approximately 0.9%), equivalent mean power in a constant-power test lasting 1 minute to 3 hours on a treadmill or cycle ergometer (0.9 to 2.0%), lactate-threshold power (approximately 1.5%), and jump height or distance (approximately 2.0%). The CV for mean power on isokinetic ergometers was relatively large (> 4%). CV were larger for nonathletes versus athletes (1.3 x), female versus male nonathletes (1.4 x), shorter (approximately 1-second) and longer (approximately 1-hour) versus 1-minute tests (< or = 1.6 x), and respiratory- versus ergometer-based measures of power (1.4 to 1.6 x). There was no clear-cut effect of time between trials. The importance of a practice trial was evident in studies with > 2 trials: the CV between the first 2 trials was 1.3 times the CV between subsequent trials; performance also improved by 1.2% between the first 2 trials but by only 0.2% between subsequent trials. These findings should help exercise practitioners and researchers select or design good measures and protocols for tests of physical performance.
Literature describing the use of hand-held dynamometry was examined to determine whether conclusions could be drawn regarding intertester reliability. 18 studies reporting intertester reliability coefficients were found and summarized. These suggest that high intertester reliability can be obtained, but that it is in jeopardy if tester strength is low relative to the forces being measured.
This is the first in a two-part series of papers dealing with the area of assessing human errors in high risk complex systems. This first paper outlines thirty-eight approaches of error identification, categorising them into types of error identification approach. The paper then reviews these techniques with respect to a broad range of criteria. Viable and non-viable techniques are identified. Trends and research needs are also noted. The second paper proposes a framework or tool-kit approach to Human Error Identification, and presents a prototype methodology to show what such a framework approach would look like in practice, for the nuclear power domain.