The sit-and-reach test is one of the most commonly used field tests to assess flexibility, however, questions remain regarding the consistency of its measurement across populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of potential moderators on the absolute test-retest reliability of sit-and-reach tests in healthy individuals. The main finding was that no evidence of moderation was observed for test–retest interval or test protocol (standard vs. modified) on absolute reliability, as measured by minimal difference (MD) and %MD. In contrast, age significantly moderated MD but not %MD. This finding suggests that MD in absolute terms may increase with age, whereas when expressed relative to performance (%MD), reliability remains similar across ages. Nevertheless, caution is warranted as several factors (e.g. variation in absolute reliability across age ranges, limited number of studies with longer test-retest interval, and few studies assessing the modified sit-and-reach test) may have limited the ability to detect potential moderating effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science