Counter movement jump and sport specific frequency speed of kick test to discriminate between elite and sub-elite kickboxers

Validity and reliability of "My Jump app" to assess vertical jump performance: a meta-analytic review

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the validity and reliability of the My Jump smartphone application in measuring vertical jump height, specifically using flight-time-based measures. To identify potential studies for inclusion, a comprehensive search strategy was employed in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EBSCO host databases. Validity was assessed in two ways: (1) mean and standard deviations of My Jump measurements were compared to criterion methods to assess the agreement of raw scores; (2) correlation coefficients evaluated the within-group consistency of rankings between My Jump and criterion methods. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Heterogeneity was evaluated via Cochrane's Q statistic, its p-value, I2 value, and tau2 value. Publication bias was explored through funnel plot symmetry and confirmed with extended Egger's test. Following the search, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria. Results showed no significant difference in raw scores between My Jump and criterion methods, indicating high agreement. High correlation was also found for within-group rankings, suggesting consistency. The My Jump application demonstrated nearly perfect reliability scores. The My Jump application appears to be a valid and reliable tool for sports scientists and strength and conditioning practitioners, offering a cost-effective and accessible means for accurately assessing vertical jump performance in various settings. However, it should be noted that these results are specific to flight-time-based measures, and further research is needed to validate these findings against gold-standard take-off velocity methods.

Reliability and Validity of the Kickboxing Anaerobic Speed Test

Purpose: This study investigated the test-retest reliability and discriminant validity of the Kickboxing Anaerobic Speed Test (KAST) and established a comparison with the maximal cycling sprint test (MCST). Methods: Forty-two male kickboxing athletes (18 elite and 24 sub-elite) participated in this study. Kickboxers performed the tests in both single and multiple forms. The KASTsingle was composed of kicks and punches, performed as quickly as possible until 5 reps of a 4 techniques' combination (i.e., straight left punch, right-roundhouse kick, straight right punch, and left-roundhouse kick) were completed. The MCSTsingle was composed by a single 6-s maximal effort. The KASTmultiple was performed using 5 sequential sets of the single form following a 10s rest interval between sets. The MCSTmultiple was performed using 5 × 6 s repeated cycling efforts with 10s rest intervals. The tests and retests were carried out on separate occasions. To establish the test's discriminatory capability, elite and sub-elite athletes were compared. Results: All tests' performance scores showed excellent relative and absolute reliability (ICC > 0.900, SEM ≤ 0.98 s for KASTs and ≤ 0.74 W•kg-1 for MCST tests). Significant correlations between the identical versions were "large" (r > 0.70). Receiving operating characteristic analyses indicated that the KASTs and cycling tests were able to effectively discriminate between elite and sub-elite kickboxers. Additionally, the findings showed that KASTsingle, MCSTsingle, KASTmultiple, and MCSTmultiple correctly classified the groups by 78.6%, 73.6%, 88.1%, and 78.6%, respectively. Conclusions: This study supported the test-retest reliability and the discriminant validity of the KASTsingle and KASTmultiple to evaluate kickboxing athletes.