4.6 Article

The acceleration dependent validity and reliability of 10 Hz GPS

期刊

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND MEDICINE IN SPORT
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 562-566

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2013.08.005

关键词

Global positioning; Time motion; Team sports; Monitoring

资金

  1. Newcastle United Football Club
  2. School of Life Sciences, Northumbria University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To examine the validity and inter-unit reliability of 10 Hz GPS for measuring instantaneous velocity during maximal accelerations. Design: Experimental. Methods: Two 10 Hz GPS devices secured to a sliding platform mounted on a custom built monorail were towed whilst sprinting maximally over 10 m. Displacement of GPS devices was measured using a laser sampling at 2000 Hz, from which velocity and mean acceleration were derived. Velocity data was pooled into acceleration thresholds according to mean acceleration. Agreement between laser and GPS measures of instantaneous velocity within each acceleration threshold was examined using least squares linear regression and Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LOA). Inter-unit reliability was expressed as typical error (TE) and a Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: Mean bias +/- 95% LOA during accelerations of 0-0.99 m s(-2) was 0.12 +/- 0.27 m s(-1), decreasing to -0.40 +/- 0.67 m s(-1) during accelerations >4 m s(-2) Standard error of the estimate +/- 95% CI (SEE) increased from 0.12 +/- 0.02 m s(-1) during accelerations of 0-0.99 m s(-2) to 032 +/- 0.06 m s(-1) during accelerations >4 m s(-2). TE increased from 0.05 +/- 0.01 to 0.12 +/- 0.01 m s(-1) during accelerations of 0-0.99 m s(-2) and >4 m s(-2) respectively. Conclusion: The validity and reliability of 10 Hz GPS for the measurement of instantaneous velocity has been shown to be inversely related to acceleration. Those using 10 Hz GPS should be aware that during accelerations of over 4 m s(-2), accuracy is compromised. (C) 2013 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据