Criterion-Related Validity of Field-Based Fitness Tests in Adults: A Systematic Review

Abstract

We comprehensively assessed the criterion-related validity of existing field-based fitness tests used to indicate adult health (19–64 years, with no known pathologies). The medical electronic databases MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Web of Science (all databases) were screened for studies published up to July 2020. Each original study’s methodological quality was classified as high, low and very low, according to the number of participants, the description of the study population, statistical analysis and systematic reviews which were appraised via the AMSTAR rating scale. Three evidence levels were constructed (strong, moderate and limited evidence) according to the number of studies and the consistency of the findings. We identified 101 original studies (50 of high quality) and five systematic reviews examining the criterion-related validity of field-based fitness tests in adults. Strong evidence indicated that the 20 m shuttle run, 1.5-mile, 12 min run/walk, YMCA step, 2 km walk and 6 min walk test are valid for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness; the handgrip strength test is valid for assessing hand maximal isometric strength; and the Biering–Sørensen test to evaluate the endurance strength of hip and back muscles; however, the sit-and reach test, and its different versions, and the toe-to-touch test are not valid for assessing hamstring and lower back flexibility. We found moderate evidence supporting that the 20 m square shuttle run test is a valid test for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness. Other field-based fitness tests presented limited evidence, mainly due to few studies. We developed an evidence-based proposal of the most valid field-based fitness tests in healthy adults aged 19–64 years old.

Validation of an Allometric Model to Predict Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Young adults from 20-M Shuttle Run Test Performance

“…A recent meta-analysis concluded that the shuttle run test provided a useful alternative for estimating CRF with the performance score on the 20m SRT being a strong estimate of CRF in adults [8]. The latter study was reinforced by Castro-Pinero, et al [9] who provided ('strong') evidence suggesting the 20mSRT was valid for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness in healthy adults aged 19-64 years of age.…”

Evolution of Field-Based Physical Fitness Assessments

“…Poor reliability reduces validity of tests and usefulness of results. Exercise professionals should select tests with easy-to-follow procedures, observation, and performance criteria that match their skill proficiency and competence (3,30).…”

“…Reliability refers to whether test results are repeatable by the same or between separate administrators (30). Following standardized protocols and procedures, giving consistent client instructions, conducting routine calibration of equipment, and developing test administrator technical skill(s) proficiency can affect the quality, accuracy, and usefulness of results for prescribing clients' exercise programs.…”

The reliability, validity and usefulness of the 30–15 intermittent fitness test for cardiorespiratory fitness assessment in military personnel

“…In addition to the 2 MR , several other field tests such as the 12-mile run, the 3000-m run, the 2400-m run, and the 1-mile run are used for CRF evaluation of military personnel 3,9 . Later tests are usually conducted outdoors and were found to have questionable validity ranging from low to high 10,11 . Therefore, weather, climate, and terrain can influence the results and may limit the maximum and reliable performance.…”