Literature DB >> 26664269

Impact of Sport Context and Support on the Use of a Self-Report Measure for Athlete Monitoring.

Anna E Saw1, Luana C Main2, Paul B Gastin1.   

Abstract

Athlete self-report measures (ASRM) are a popular method of athlete monitoring in high-performance sports. With increasing recognition and accessibility, ASRM may potentially be utilized by athletes from diverse sport contexts. The purpose of the present study was to improve understanding of ASRM implementation across different sport contexts by observing uptake and compliance of a newly implemented ASRM over 16 weeks, and investigating the perceived roles and factors influencing implementation. Athletes (n=131) completed an electronic survey at baseline and week 16 on their perceptions and experiences with ASRM implementation respectively. Despite initial interest, only 70 athletes attempted to use the ASRM. Of these athletes, team sport athletes who were supported by their coach or sports program to use the ASRM were most compliant (p < 0.001) with a mean compliance of 84 ± 21 %. Compliance for self-directed individual and team sport athletes was 28 ± 40 % and 8 ± 18 % respectively. Self-directed athletes were motivated to monitor themselves, and rated desired content and minimal burden as key factors for initial and ongoing compliance. Supported athletes were primarily motivated to comply for the benefit of their coach or sports program rather than themselves, however rated data output as a key factor for their continued use. Factors of the measure outweighed those of the social environment regardless of sport context, however the influence of social environmental factors should not be discounted. The findings of the present study demonstrate the impact of sport context on the implementation of an ASRM and the need to tailor implementation strategies accordingly. Key pointsAthletes perceive ASRM and the factors influencing implementation differently. Therefore, to encourage compliance, it is important to tailor implementation strategies to the athlete and their sport context to increase appeal and minimize unappealing factors.Athletes using an ASRM on their own accord typically favor a measure which meets their needs and interests, with minimal burden.Athletes using an ASRM under the direction and support of their coach or sports program typically favor feedback and a positive social environment.

Keywords:  Training diary; compliance; questionnaire; well-being

Year:  2015        PMID: 26664269      PMCID: PMC4657415     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci Med        ISSN: 1303-2968            Impact factor:   2.988


  13 in total

1.  Athletic injury, psychosocial factors and perceptual changes during stress.

Authors:  M B Andersen; J M Williams
Journal:  J Sports Sci       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.337

2.  The relationship of depression and stressors to immunological assays: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  E P Zorrilla; L Luborsky; J R McKay; R Rosenthal; A Houldin; A Tax; R McCorkle; D A Seligman; K Schmidt
Journal:  Brain Behav Immun       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 7.217

Review 3.  Preventing overtraining in athletes in high-intensity sports and stress/recovery monitoring.

Authors:  M Kellmann
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.221

Review 4.  Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation.

Authors:  Joseph A Durlak; Emily P DuPre
Journal:  Am J Community Psychol       Date:  2008-06

5.  Protecting the health of the @hlete: how online technology may aid our common goal to prevent injury and illness in sport.

Authors:  Evert Verhagen; Caroline Bolling
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2015-01-22       Impact factor: 13.800

6.  Monitoring athletes through self-report: factors influencing implementation.

Authors:  Anna E Saw; Luana C Main; Paul B Gastin
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2015-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

7.  Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of the overtraining syndrome: joint consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science and the American College of Sports Medicine.

Authors:  Romain Meeusen; Martine Duclos; Carl Foster; Andrew Fry; Michael Gleeson; David Nieman; John Raglin; Gerard Rietjens; Jürgen Steinacker; Axel Urhausen
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.411

8.  Role of a self-report measure in athlete preparation.

Authors:  Anna E Saw; Luana C Main; Paul B Gastin
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.775

9.  Psychological monitoring and modulation of training load of world-class canoeists.

Authors:  B Berglund; H Säfström
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 5.411

10.  Implementing injury surveillance systems alongside injury prevention programs: evaluation of an online surveillance system in a community setting.

Authors:  Christina L Ekegren; Alex Donaldson; Belinda J Gabbe; Caroline F Finch
Journal:  Inj Epidemiol       Date:  2014-07-24
View more
  5 in total

1.  Mobile Athlete Self-Report Measures and the Complexities of Implementation.

Authors:  Ciara M Duignan; Patrick J Slevin; Brian M Caulfield; Catherine Blake
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 2.988

2.  A qualitative examination of the factors affecting the adoption of injury focused wearable technologies in recreational runners.

Authors:  Aisling Lacey; Enda Whyte; Sinéad O'Keeffe; Siobhán O'Connor; Kieran Moran
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  Athlete Self-Report Measure Use and Associated Psychological Alterations.

Authors:  Anna E Saw; Luana C Main; Sam Robertson; Paul B Gastin
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2017-07-26

4.  mHealth Self-Report Monitoring in Competitive Middle- and Long-Distance Runners: Qualitative Study of Long-Term Use Intentions Using the Technology Acceptance Model.

Authors:  Sara Rönnby; Oscar Lundberg; Kristina Fagher; Jenny Jacobsson; Bo Tillander; Håkan Gauffin; Per-Olof Hansson; Örjan Dahlström; Toomas Timpka
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 4.773

5.  Collecting Health and Exposure Data in Australian Olympic Combat Sports: Feasibility Study Utilizing an Electronic System.

Authors:  Sally Bromley; Michael Drew; Scott Talpey; Andrew McIntosh; Caroline Finch
Journal:  JMIR Hum Factors       Date:  2018-10-09
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.