Taylor N, Giles D, Panáčková M, Mitchell J, Chidley J, Draper N. A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Sport Climbers' Movement Performance.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2020;
15:795-800. [PMID:
32106082 DOI:
10.1123/ijspp.2019-0311]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2019] [Revised: 09/09/2019] [Accepted: 09/11/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE
To assess the validity and reliability of a novel movement-performance assessment tool for climbing/sport climbing.
METHODS
First, salient climbing movement-performance factors were identified through an iterative consultation process with 10 expert climbing coaches; the resulting Climber's Movement Performance Assessment Tool (CM-PAT) contained 14 items in 5 categories. Second, 61 intermediate to advanced climbers ascended a single route, which was video recorded. Subsequently, 4 experienced (>10 y coaching) coaches used the CM-PAT to observe and score the climbers' performance. Interrater reliability and comparisons with existing measures of climbing performance (6-mo self-reported ability, success and failure, climbing pace [m·min-1], and geometric entropy) were made.
RESULTS
Intraclass correlation coefficient (2,k) for the 4 raters demonstrated excellent reliability (>.81) between observers and good to excellent test-retest reliability (.71-.91). Pearson correlations between self-reported ability and CM-PAT scores explained 61% of the variance in self-reported climbing performance compared with 16% for geometric entropy and 52% for climbing pace. Considering differences in successful and unsuccessful climbers, the CM-PAT (P < .0005; d = 2.14), geometric entropy (P = .014; d = 0.67), and pace (P < .0005; d = 1.88) were able to differentiate between groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The CM-PAT is the first sport climbing performance observational instrument to be developed through a thorough iterative process with expert coaches. Excellent interrater and test-retest reliability and excellent agreement with self-reported ability and with existing quantitative measures of performance support its recommendation for use in coaching and research contexts. Notably, a key advantage over existing measures is the identification of coachable elements of performance.
Collapse