Background:Sport climbing is becoming incredibly popular both in the general population and among athletes.No consensus exists regarding evidence-based sport-specific performance evaluation;therefore,this systematic r...Background:Sport climbing is becoming incredibly popular both in the general population and among athletes.No consensus exists regarding evidence-based sport-specific performance evaluation;therefore,this systematic review was aimed at analyzing determinants of sport climbing performance and evaluation methods by comparing climbers of different levels.Methods:PubMed,Scopus,and Web of Science were searched up to December 20,2022.Studies providing the self-reported climbing ability associated with different functional outcomes in groups of climbers of contiguous performance levels were eligible.Results:74 studies were finally included.Various methods have been proposed to evaluate determinants of sport climbing performance.Climbing-specific assessments were able to discriminate climbers of different levels when compared to general functional tests.Test validity resulted high for climbing-specific cardiorespiratory endurance as well as muscular-strength,-endurance,and-power;similarly,reliability was good except for cardiorespiratory endurance.Climbing-specific flexibility assessment resulted in high reliability but moderate validity,whereas balance showed low validity.Considerable conflicting evidence was found regarding anthropometric characteristics.Conclusion:The present analysis identified cardiorespiratory endurance as well as muscular-strength,-endurance,and-power as determinants of sport climbing performance.In contrast,balance,flexibility,and anthropometric characteristics seem to count less.This review also proposes an evidence-based Functional Sport Climbing test battery for asses sing performance determinants,which includes tests that have been identified to be valid,reliable,and feasible.While athletes and coaches should rely on evidence-based and standardized evaluation methods,researchers may design specific large-scale trials as a resource for providing additional,homogenous,and comparable data to improve scientific evidence and professionalism in this popular sport discipline.展开更多
文摘Background:Sport climbing is becoming incredibly popular both in the general population and among athletes.No consensus exists regarding evidence-based sport-specific performance evaluation;therefore,this systematic review was aimed at analyzing determinants of sport climbing performance and evaluation methods by comparing climbers of different levels.Methods:PubMed,Scopus,and Web of Science were searched up to December 20,2022.Studies providing the self-reported climbing ability associated with different functional outcomes in groups of climbers of contiguous performance levels were eligible.Results:74 studies were finally included.Various methods have been proposed to evaluate determinants of sport climbing performance.Climbing-specific assessments were able to discriminate climbers of different levels when compared to general functional tests.Test validity resulted high for climbing-specific cardiorespiratory endurance as well as muscular-strength,-endurance,and-power;similarly,reliability was good except for cardiorespiratory endurance.Climbing-specific flexibility assessment resulted in high reliability but moderate validity,whereas balance showed low validity.Considerable conflicting evidence was found regarding anthropometric characteristics.Conclusion:The present analysis identified cardiorespiratory endurance as well as muscular-strength,-endurance,and-power as determinants of sport climbing performance.In contrast,balance,flexibility,and anthropometric characteristics seem to count less.This review also proposes an evidence-based Functional Sport Climbing test battery for asses sing performance determinants,which includes tests that have been identified to be valid,reliable,and feasible.While athletes and coaches should rely on evidence-based and standardized evaluation methods,researchers may design specific large-scale trials as a resource for providing additional,homogenous,and comparable data to improve scientific evidence and professionalism in this popular sport discipline.
