Assessment of Countermovement Jump: What Should We Report?
2023
Zdravko Anicic | Danica Janicijevic | Olivera M. Knezevic | Amador Garcia-Ramos | Milos R. Petrovic | Dimitrije Cabarkapa | Dragan M. Mirkov
The purpose of the present study was (i) to explore the reliability of the most commonly used countermovement jump (CMJ) metrics, and (ii) to reduce a large pool of metrics with acceptable levels of reliability via principal component analysis to the significant factors capable of providing distinctive aspects of CMJ performance. Seventy-nine physically active participants (thirty-seven females and forty-two males) performed three maximal CMJs while standing on a force platform. Each participant visited the laboratory on two occasions, separated by 24&ndash:48 h. The most reliable variables were performance variables (CV = 4.2&ndash:11.1%), followed by kinetic variables (CV = 1.6&ndash:93.4%), and finally kinematic variables (CV = 1.9&ndash:37.4%). From the 45 CMJ computed metrics, only 24 demonstrated acceptable levels of reliability (CV &le: 10%). These variables were included in the principal component analysis and loaded a total of four factors, explaining 91% of the CMJ variance: performance component (variables responsible for overall jump performance), eccentric component (variables related to the breaking phase), concentric component (variables related to the upward phase), and jump strategy component (variables influencing the jumping style). Overall, the findings revealed important implications for sports scientists and practitioners regarding the CMJ-derived metrics that should be considered to gain a comprehensive insight into the biomechanical parameters related to CMJ performance.
Show more [+] Less [-]AGROVOC Keywords
Bibliographic information
This bibliographic record has been provided by Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
