Audio Abstracts are changing the way scientific research is being communicated. Watch Sam’s video below where he delves into his article ‘Consensus on Measurement Properties and Feasibility of Performance Tests for the Exercise & Sport Sciences: a Delphi study’, highlighting the purpose of the study, its limitations and the practical applications. If you want to read the abstract or access the full paper (where available), all links are below.

The full paper can be found on Researchgate

Sam can be found on Twitter @Robertson_SJ

Abstract: Performance tests are used for multiple purposes in exercise and sport science. Ensuring that a test displays an appropriate level of measurement properties for use within a population is important to ensure confidence in test findings. The aim of this study was to obtain subject matter expert consensus on the measurement and feasibility properties that should be considered for performance tests used in the exercise and sport sciences and how these should be defined. This information was used to develop a checklist for broader dissemination. A two-round Delphi study was undertaken including 33 exercise scientists, academics and sport scientists. Participants were asked to rate the importance of a range of measurement properties relevant to performance tests in exercise and sport science. Responses were obtained in binary and Likert-scale formats, with consensus defined as achieving 67% agreement on each question. Consensus was reached on definitions and terminology for all items. Ten level 1 items (those that achieved consensus on all four questions) and nine level 2 items (those achieving consensus on ≥2 questions) were included. Both levels were included in the final checklist. The checklist developed from this study can be used to inform decision-making and test selection for practitioners and researchers in the exercise and sport sciences. This can facilitate knowledge sharing and performance comparisons across sub-disciplines, thereby improving existing field practice and research methodological quality.