Systematic review of basketball referees’ performances

Abstract

The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRaP URL' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

Load Measures in Training/Match Monitoring in Soccer: A Systematic Review

“…Through the kappa index, as used in other reviews [ 5 , 7 , 8 , 10 ], a value of 0.755 was obtained for interobserver reliability, indicating a substantial agreement between observers [ 12 ]. The quality of the articles included in this review is confirmed by the following indicators: the average quality score of the articles was 85.7%; 75 articles had a score above 75%, and below 100% (excellent methodological quality); 7 articles exposed scores between 51% and 75% (good methodological quality); and no article had a score equal to or less than 50% (low methodological quality).…”

“…To assess the quality of the studies, the risk-bias quality form used by Gómez-Carmona [ 5 ], Reina [ 7 ], Sarmento [ 8 ] and García-Santos [ 10 ], adapted from the original version developed by Law [ 11 ], was adopted. This evaluation is composed of 16 items and was performed by two researchers, with valuable expertise on this topic.…”

“…The introduction of the option “not applicable” allowed a correct score of the article, eliminating the negative effect of assuming the value 0 on a binary scale, when in fact that item was not applicable to that study. As in the studies by Gómez-Carmona [ 5 ], Reina [ 7 ], Sarmento [ 8 ] and García-Santos [ 10 ], to make a fair comparison between studies with different designs, the percentage score was calculated as a final measure of methodological quality. For this, the sum of the score of all items was divided by the number of relevant scored items for that specific research design.…”

“…In an attempt to simplify the training load quantification, Foster [ 111 ] introduced the use of the session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) instead of using HR data or measuring the intensity of the session, or the type of exercise performed. The sRPE, obtained after the completion of training and/or the match, classifies the general difficulty of the session by multiplying the RPE by the duration of the exercise, in minutes [ 111 ] and, based on the scale of 0 to 10, has been widely used in the evaluation of internal load, both in training and in competition [ 7 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 39 , 61 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 72 , 74 , 75 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 84 , 85 ]. On the other hand, Coppalle [ 66 ] and Owen [ 86 ] used the 6–20 scale to determine sRPE.…”

Dependence of objectivity in basketball game officiating on the number of referees

“…Current research shows the importance and influence of the basketball referee during competition (Garcia-Santos et al, 2020). Referees' decisions are expected to be fast and correct and high level of referees' objectivity is expected by all the interested parties.…”