+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Criterion-related validity of field-based fitness tests in youth: a systematic review.

      British Journal of Sports Medicine

      Adolescent, Body Composition, physiology, Body Mass Index, Cardiovascular Physiological Phenomena, Child, Exercise Test, methods, Female, Hand Strength, Health Status, Humans, Male, Musculoskeletal Physiological Phenomena, Physical Fitness, Skinfold Thickness, Waist Circumference

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          The objective of this systematic review was to comprehensively study the criterion-related validity of the existing field-based fitness tests used in children and adolescents. The studies were scored according to the number of subjects, description of the study population and statistical analysis. Each study was classified as high, low and very low quality. Three levels of evidence were constructed: strong evidence, when consistent findings were observed in three or more high quality studies; moderate evidence, when consistent findings were observed in two high quality studies; and limited evidence when consistency of findings and/or the number of studies did not achieve the criteria for moderate. The results of 73 studies (50 of high quality) addressing the criterion-related validity of field-based fitness tests in children and adolescents indicate the following: that there is strong evidence indicating that the 20 m shuttle run test is a valid test to estimate cardiorespiratory fitness, that the hand-grip strength test is a valid measure of musculoskeletal fitness, that skin fold thickness and body mass index are good estimates of body composition, and that waist circumference is a valid measure to estimate central body fat. Moderate evidence was found that the 1-mile run/walk test is a valid test to estimate cardiorespiratory fitness. A large number of other field-based fitness tests presented limited evidence, mainly due to a limited number of studies (one for each test). The results of the present systematic review should be interpreted with caution due to the substantial lack of consistency in reporting and designing the existing validity studies.

          Related collections

          Author and article information



          Comment on this article