dc.creator | Chacón Moscoso, Salvador | es |
dc.creator | Sanduvete Chaves, Susana | es |
dc.creator | Anguera Argilaga, María Teresa | es |
dc.creator | Losada, José L. | es |
dc.creator | Portell Vidal, Mariona | es |
dc.creator | Lozano Lozano, José Antonio | es |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-04-03T13:32:31Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-04-03T13:32:31Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2018-03-08 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Chacón Moscoso, S., Sanduvete Chaves, S., Anguera Argilaga, M.T., Losada, J.L., Portell Vidal, M. y Lozano Lozano, J.A. (2018). Preliminary Checklist for Reporting Observational Studies in Sports Areas: Content Validity. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1664-1078 | es |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/71633 | |
dc.description.abstract | Observational studies are based on systematic observation, understood as an organized
recording and quantification of behavior in its natural context. Applied to the specific area
of sports, observational studies present advantages when comparing studies based on
other designs, such as the flexibility for adapting to different contexts and the possibility of
using non-standardized instruments as well as a high degree of development in specific
software and data analysis. Although the importance and usefulness of sports-related
observational studies have been widely shown, there is no checklist to report these
studies. Consequently, authors do not have a guide to follow in order to include all of
the important elements in an observational study in sports areas, and reviewers do not
have a reference tool for assessing this type of work. To resolve these issues, this article
aims to develop a checklist to measure the quality of sports-related observational studies
based on a content validity study. The participants were 22 judges with at least 3 years of
experience in observational studies, sports areas, and methodology. They evaluated a list
of 60 items systematically selected and classified into 12 dimensions. They were asked
to score four aspects of each item on 5-point Likert scales to measure the following
dimensions: representativeness, relevance, utility, and feasibility. The judges also had an
open-format section for comments. The Osterlind index was calculated for each item
and for each of the four aspects. Items were considered appropriate when obtaining
a score of at least 0.5 in the four assessed aspects. After considering these inclusion
criteria and all of the open-format comments, the resultant checklist consisted of 54
items grouped into the same initial 12 dimensions. Finally, we highlight the strengths of
this work. We also present its main limitation: the need to apply the resultant checklist to
obtain data and, thus, increase quality indicators of its psychometric properties. For this
reason, as relevant actions for further development, we encourage expert readers to use
it and provide feedback; we plan to apply it to different sport areas. | es |
dc.description.sponsorship | Fondo para el Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico de Chile-FONDECYT 1150096 | es |
dc.description.sponsorship | Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad de España PSI2015-71947- REDT | es |
dc.description.sponsorship | Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad de España, Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional DEP2015-66069-P | es |
dc.description.sponsorship | Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación de España PSI2011-29587 | es |
dc.format | application/pdf | es |
dc.language.iso | eng | es |
dc.publisher | Frontiers Media | es |
dc.relation.ispartof | Frontiers in Psychology, 9 | |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Checklist | es |
dc.subject | Reporting | es |
dc.subject | Observational studies | es |
dc.subject | Sports area | es |
dc.subject | Content validity | es |
dc.subject | Experts | es |
dc.subject | Osterlind index | es |
dc.title | Preliminary Checklist for Reporting Observational Studies in Sports Areas: Content Validity | es |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | es |
dcterms.identifier | https://ror.org/03yxnpp24 | |
dc.type.version | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | es |
dc.rights.accessRights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | es |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Universidad de Sevilla. Departamento de Psicología Experimental | es |
dc.relation.projectID | 1150096 | es |
dc.relation.projectID | PSI2015-71947- REDT | es |
dc.relation.projectID | DEP2015-66069-P | es |
dc.relation.projectID | PSI2011-29587 | es |
dc.relation.publisherversion | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00291 | es |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00291 | es |
dc.contributor.group | Universidad de Sevilla. HUM-649: Innovaciones Metodológicas en Evaluación de Programas | es |
idus.format.extent | 10 p. | es |
dc.journaltitle | Frontiers in Psychology | es |
dc.publication.volumen | 9 | es |
dc.description.awardwinning | Premio Trimestral Publicación Científica Destacada de la US. Facultad de Psicología | |