Reliability, Device Agreement and Validity of Load-Velocity Profiles: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Nina Claassen; Stanislav Dimitri Siegel; Mareike Sproll; Niklas Lebelt; Alyssa Virginia Bargende; Anne Marieke Fasold; Konstantin Warneke

doi:10.1186/s40798-026-01102-0

PubMed · 42690493

Reliability, Device Agreement and Validity of Load-Velocity Profiles: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Nina Claassen·Stanislav Dimitri Siegel·Mareike Sproll·Niklas Lebelt·Alyssa Virginia Bargende·Anne Marieke Fasold·Konstantin Warneke

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For a valid one-repetition maximum (1RM) prediction via load-velocity (LV) relationships, high reliability and accuracy must be assumed. OBJECTIVE: Since individual study results indicate ambivalent prediction, this systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to provide a updated and comprehensive overview, extending knowledge about the validity and reliability of commercially available velocity sensors in Part I and the validity and reliability of velocity-based 1RM prediction models in Part II. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus. Validity and/or reliability studies or velocity-based 1RM prediction evaluations were included. Methodological quality was assessed using adapted COSMIN. The analysis was performed for intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and Pearson's correlation coefficient (r). The review was preregistered in PROSPERO (CRD42025634595). RESULTS: Sixty-three studies were included for sensor validity and reliability and 38 for 1RM prediction models. Part I: Velocity sensors demonstrated good-to-excellent pooled validity and device agreement (ICC = 0.91-0.92 [0.83-0.97]; k = 55 and 439, respectively); intra- and inter-day reliability were classified as good to excellent with ICC = 0.90-0.91 [0.85-0.95] (k = 228 and 608, respectively), with sensor technology moderating the results. However, substantial heterogeneity and wide ranges of study-level estimates indicated considerable variability across moderators, linear position transducer (LPT) generally showing more consistent performance than inertial measurement units (IMU). Part II: Velocity-based 1RM prediction showed ICCs = 0.90 [0.83-0.94] (k = 124) and ICC = 0.91 [0.72-0.98] (k = 9); for reliability and validity, respectively. DISCUSSION: Commercial velocity sensors generally provide high relative validity and reliability. Results varied depending on exercise complexity, intensity, sensor technology, and modeling approach. While velocity-based 1RM prediction demonstrated high average validity, large heterogeneity in lower body exercises significantly biased the results. Furthermore, the dearth of measurement error and agreement analyses prohibits final conclusions. CONCLUSION: Therefore, velocity-based monitoring and 1RM prediction require cautious interpretation, as sensor- and exercise-specific evidence remains limited.

Explore related subjects

Load–velocity relationship Measurement reliability Measurement validity Meta-analysis Movement velocity One-repetition maximum prediction Resistance training Velocity-based training Wearable sensors Journal Article Systematic Review

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Nina Claassen, Stanislav Dimitri Siegel, Mareike Sproll, Niklas Lebelt, Alyssa Virginia Bargende, Anne Marieke Fasold, Konstantin Warneke. 2026-09-03. Reliability, Device Agreement and Validity of Load-Velocity Profiles: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-026-01102-0

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Journal Article; Systematic Review resource Journal Article subject Meta-Analysis subject Systematic reviews study

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Validation of a Turkish Translation of the Stress in Emergency Healthcare Professionals: The Stress Factors and Manifestations Scale.

AIM: The primary duties of emergency healthcare professionals (EHPs) are to provide emergency patient care to acutely ill and injured individuals. Due to the nature of their work, EHPs operate under constant stress, often requiring rapid decision-making, swift action, and the delivery of necessary medical care in life-or-death situations, sometimes under inadequately safe conditions. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the validity and reliability of the Emergency Healthcare Professional Stress Factors and Symptoms (SEHP:SFMS) Scale in Turkish for identifying stress factors and symptoms in emergency medical care professionals providing emergency patient care services. DESIGN: A methodological study design was used in this study. METHODS: The study was conducted with the participation of 211 EHPs from employees working in emergency care institutions affiliated with the Muğla Provincial Health Directorate between November 2023 and June 2024. Data were collected via a face-to-face survey. Data were analysed using Lawshe content validity ratio, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin coefficient, Bartlett test, exploratory factor analysis, principal component analysis, Varimax factor rotation method, confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach's α internal consistency coefficient, convergent validity, discriminant validity, test-retest, and Spearman correlation coefficient tests. RESULTS: The linguistic translation and cultural adaptation of the SEHP:SFMS showed strong performance. The scope validity index of the scale is 0.83. The item-total correlation values of the scale were found to be between 0.486 and 0.794, and the factor loadings were between 0.474 and 0.816. Confirmatory factor analysis fit indices: χ2 = 248.727; df = 101; n = 211; p = 0.000; χ2/df = 2.463; RMSEA = 0.083; CFI = 0.914, SRMR = 0.052, which was found to be compatible and acceptable with the proposed 3-factor model. The Cronbach's α reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.931, and the total variance was 61.97%. CONCLUSIONS: SEHP:SFMS is a valid and reliable tool to assess stress factors and symptoms of Turkish emergency healthcare professionals. Its use improves the quality of emergency care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: These study findings have been used to create a tool with Turkish validity and reliability that allows for the examination of stress factors among healthcare professionals working in emergency and critical services. Identifying and reducing stress factors among healthcare professionals is crucial for the delivery of quality healthcare services. It can also be used to develop targeted interventions and ongoing strategies to facilitate improved clinical supervision and mentoring. IMPLICATION FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses in emergency departments, which are among the most stressful, dynamic, intense, life-saving, and critical environments in healthcare institutions, and where life-saving treatment is administered, are at high risk of experiencing psychological trauma. Trauma experienced in the work environment is a significant problem for nursing. The consequences of trauma negatively affect nurses and institutions. Studies show that post-traumatic stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout are commonly observed in emergency department nurses. In this sense, understanding the stress and stress factors experienced by nurses can guide future interventions. The results of this study are considered important in making visible the stress and stress factors experienced by nurses in the emergency department, and also in guiding managers and nurses working in this field in terms of preventive and protective measures.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Single-Dose Programmed Cell Death Protein 1 Inhibitor, Budigalimab, in People With HIV-1 With Antiretroviral Therapy-Suppressed Viral Load.

BACKGROUND: Blockade of inhibitory immune checkpoint receptor programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) on target immune cells is associated with improved HIV-specific immune function and activation of latent HIV. This randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase 1b study assessed low doses of investigational anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, budigalimab, for safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics in people with HIV (PWH) on antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: Participants received single doses of budigalimab 10 mg subcutaneous (SC), 20 mg SC, 10 mg intravenous (IV), or placebo (n = 8 per arm) and were followed for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Of 32 randomized participants, 22 reported adverse event(s) (AE); most (n = 19) were grade ≤2 and no grade ≥4 AE or treatment-related serious AE. Two participants reported a non-treatment-related grade 3 AE (placebo, n = 1 pneumonia; 10 mg IV, n = 1 elevated aspartate aminotransferase). One reversible immune-related AE (grade 2 lichenoid keratosis) was reported (20 mg SC). Geometric mean maximum serum concentrations were 0.37, 1.57, and 3.2 µg/mL with 10 mg SC, 20 mg SC, and 10 mg IV, respectively. Drug exposure with 20 versus 10 mg SC dosing was more than dose proportional and less variable. Subcutaneous bioavailability was approximately 53%-62%. The PD-1 receptor saturation was ≥95% in most participants (median duration: 20 mg SC, 42 days; 10 mg SC, 14 days; 10 mg IV, 35 days). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest an acceptable safety profile for single-dose budigalimab in PWH, with a favorable pharmacokinetic profile for 20 mg SC and 10 mg IV. Further evaluation as a potential component of an HIV treatment is underway.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Development and validation of an LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of the KRASG12C inhibitor divarasib.

Divarasib is a newly developed covalent KRASG12C inhibitor, currently under clinical investigation in a phase 3 trial in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). At the moment, very limited pharmacokinetic data are publicly known. However, obtaining more insight into the pharmacokinetic properties of divarasib is important, since this may provide a better understanding of its efficacy and safety risks. Pre-clinical studies have been performed in mouse models to evaluate the effect of drug transporters and drug-metabolizing enzymes on the plasma exposure and tissue distribution of divarasib. Therefore, a reliable quantification method is required. To our knowledge, no bioanalytical assay of divarasib has been published yet. Therefore, in this study we developed and validated an assay to quantify divarasib in human plasma and in eight different mouse-related matrices, and partially in mouse plasma, using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The method was initially evaluated over a concentration range of 1-10,000 nM. However, due to carry-over observed at 10,000 nM, the validated calibration range was established at 1-2000 nM, with matrix-dependent LLOQs of 1-10 nM. Erlotinib was used as an internal standard and acetonitrile was utilized to perform protein precipitation as sample pretreatment. Divarasib demonstrated stability in human plasma and in mouse plasma and tissue homogenates under various experimental conditions. A pilot in vivo study showed the applicability of our validated LC-MS/MS method. Ongoing clinical trials may collect plasma samples, and this developed method enables quantification of divarasib in both mouse and human plasma samples.

Animals↗