2021
DOI: 10.3390/app11198855
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Collection and Advice on Basketball Field Tests—A Literature Review

Abstract: We conducted a review to collect the validated basketball-specific physical field tests and to provide practical advice for their appropriate selection and application. A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed via three electronic databases (PubMed, GoogleScholar, and SportDiscuss). Results of 93 studies provided recommendations for seven test packages and eighteen individual tests that have already been validated for basketball players. Although there is a lack of standardized, widely, and s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
(118 reference statements)
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…RAST seems to be a reliable test for measuring basketball players’ anaerobic capacity [ 46 ], with a test reliability coefficient of 0.88 [ 47 ]. The basketball-specific RAST included six maximal 35 m round-trip runs separated by two 17.5 m shuttle runs with 10 s rest intervals [ 48 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RAST seems to be a reliable test for measuring basketball players’ anaerobic capacity [ 46 ], with a test reliability coefficient of 0.88 [ 47 ]. The basketball-specific RAST included six maximal 35 m round-trip runs separated by two 17.5 m shuttle runs with 10 s rest intervals [ 48 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RAST served as a reliable measure of basketball players’ anaerobic capacity [ 40 ], exhibiting a test reliability coefficient of 0.88 [ 41 ]. The basketball-specific RAST protocol involved six maximal 35 m round-trip runs, interspersed with two 17.5 m shuttle runs and 10 s rest intervals [ 42 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Agility was evaluated by using the t-test and Lane agility drills, as used in previous studies [25,26]. For the t-test, athletes started the test from the standing position with their lead foot placed 20 cm behind the first photocell.…”
Section: Agilitymentioning
confidence: 99%