Author's Response

Thumbnail
Author
Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe, A.
Montalvo, A.M.
Lloyd, Rhodri S.
Read, Paul
Myer, Gregory
Date
2017-08-08
Acceptance date
2017
Type
Letter
Publisher
University of Uludag
ISSN
1303-2968
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
The authors would like to thank Dr. Smith and colleagues for their thoughtful comments regarding the most recent attempt to improve the clinical utility of the Tuck Jump Assessment Tool (TJA). Based on prior evidence and practitioner feedback, we aimed to improve the clarity of the assessment tool and add a further layer of objectivity in the scoring of each criteria to enhance its clinical utility. Here we have included our responses to Dr. Smith’s questions and concerns to provide further clarification for the readers.
Journal/conference proceeding
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine;
Citation
Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe A., Montalvo A.M., Lloyd R.S., Read P., Myer G.D. (2017) 'Author's response to 'Modified Tuck Jump Assessment: Reliability and Training of Raters'', Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 16(3), pp.440-442.
URI
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5592298/
http://hdl.handle.net/10369/10497
Description
Letter in response to Smith et al. (2017) 'Modified Tuck Jump Assessment: Reliability and Training of Raters', published online on 08 August 2017, available open access at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5592298/.
Rights
http://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
Sponsorship
Cardiff Metropolitan University (Grant ID: Cardiff Metropolian (Internal))
Collections