PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 1, 2005The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research4,510 citations

Quantifying Test-Retest Reliability Using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and the SEM

View Full Paper
JWJoseph P. Weir

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Reliability, the consistency of a test or measurement, is frequently quantified in the movement sciences literature. A common metric is the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In addition, the SEM, which can be calculated from the ICC, is also frequently reported in reliability studies. However, there are several versions of the ICC, and confusion exists in the movement sciences regarding which ICC to use. Further, the utility of the SEM is not fully appreciated. In this review, the basics of classic reliability theory are addressed in the context of choosing and interpreting an ICC. The primary distinction between ICC equations is argued to be one concerning the inclusion (equations 2,1 and 2,k) or exclusion (equations 3,1 and 3,k) of systematic error in the denominator of the ICC equation. Inferential tests of mean differences, which are performed in the process of deriving the necessary variance components for the calculation of ICC values, are useful to determine if systematic error is present. If so, the measurement schedule should be modified (removing trials where learning and/or fatigue effects are present) to remove systematic error, and ICC equations that only consider random error may be safely used. The use of ICC values is discussed in the context of estimating the effects of measurement error on sample size, statistical power, and correlation attenuation. Finally, calculation and application of the SEM are discussed. It is shown how the SEM and its variants can be used to construct confidence intervals for individual scores and to determine the minimal difference needed to be exhibited for one to be confident that a true change in performance of an individual has occurred.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Joseph P. Weir (2005) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d6fa2099397875bbaa7f77https://doi.org/10.1519/15184.1
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use1989 · 9,651 citations
  2. 2The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient as a Measure of Reliability1966 · 2,361 citations
  3. 3The continuing misinterpretation of the standard error of measurement.1979 · 149 citations
  4. 4On Measuring Repeatability of Data from Self-Administered Questionnaires1987 · 80 citations
  5. 5Research Methods in Physical Activity. 2nd Edn1991 · 86 citations