The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Reliability and Validity of Fatigue Measures During Multiple-Sprint Work: An Issue Revisited
Abstract
The ability to repeatedly produce a high-power output or sprint speed is a key fitness component of most field and court sports. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of eight different approaches to quantify this parameter in tests of multiple-sprint performance. Ten physically active men completed two trials of each of two multiple-sprint running protocols with contrasting recovery periods. Protocol 1 consisted of 12 x 30-m sprints repeated every 35 seconds; protocol 2 consisted of 12 x 30-m sprints repeated every 65 seconds. All testing was performed in an indoor sports facility, and sprint times were recorded using twin-beam photocells. All but one of the formulae showed good construct validity, as evidenced by similar within-protocol fatigue scores. However, the assumptions on which many of the formulae were based, combined with poor or inconsistent test-retest reliability (coefficient of variation range: 0.8-145.7%; intraclass correlation coefficient range: 0.09-0.75), suggested many problems regarding logical validity. In line with previous research, the results support the percentage decrement calculation as the most valid and reliable method of quantifying fatigue in tests of multiple-sprint performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The validity of a repeated sprint ability test
Bishop, D., Spencer, M., Duffield, R., & Lawrence, S. (2001) · Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport · doi:10.1016/s1440-2440(01)80004-9 · Cited by 259
Stone, M. H., Sanborn, K., Smith, L. L., O'Bryant, H. S., Hoke, T., Utter, A. C., Johnson, R. L., Boros, R., Hruby, J., Pierce, K. C., et al. (1999) · International Journal of Sport Nutrition · doi:10.1123/ijsn.9.2.146 · Cited by 145
Cited by
Repeated-Sprint Ability – Part I: Factors Contributing to Fatigue
Girard, O., Mendez-Villanueva, A., & Bishop, D. (2011) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.2165/11590550-000000000-00000 · Cited by 916
Energy Systems Contribution in the Running-based Anaerobic Sprint Test
Milioni, F., Zagatto, A., Barbieri, R., Andrade, V., dos Santos, J., Gobatto, C., da Silva, A., Santiago, P., & Papoti, M. (2017) · International Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0042-117722 · Cited by 72
Anthropometry, Physical and Movement Features, and Repeated-sprint Ability in Soccer Players
Campa, F., Semprini, G., Júdice, P., Messina, G., & Toselli, S. (2019) · International Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1055/a-0781-2473 · Cited by 70
Effect of carbohydrate mouth rinsing on multiple sprint performance
Dorling, J. L., & Earnest, C. P. (2013) · Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · doi:10.1186/1550-2783-10-41 · Cited by 63
West, C. R., Campbell, I. G., Goosey-Tolfrey, V. L., Mason, B. S., & Romer, L. M. (2014) · Journal of science and medicine in sport · doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2013.06.001 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- Glaister, M., Howatson, G., Pattison, J. R., & McInnes, G.
- Venue
- Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1597-1601
- ISSN
- 1064-8011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2052936672
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Reliability and Validity of Fatigue Measures During Multiple-Sprint Work: An Issue Revisited. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1519/jsc.0b013e318181ab80
- The paper
- Glaister, M., Howatson, G., Pattison, J. R., & McInnes, G. (2008). The Reliability and Validity of Fatigue Measures During Multiple-Sprint Work: An Issue Revisited. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0b013e318181ab80
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
