Table 3. GRADE grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation of the Meta-analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N
of patients |
|
|
|
| Outcomes |
Study design |
RoB |
Incon |
Indirect |
Impre |
PubBs |
Other |
Exp |
Control |
SMD (95%CI) |
Certainty
of evidence |
Importance |
| VJ |
RTC |
Very serious |
Serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
Serious |
- |
268 |
206 |
.77(.41,
1.16) |
Very
Low |
Critical |
| Sprint-PER |
RTC |
Very serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
- |
250 |
197 |
-.41(-.61,
-.22) |
low |
Critical |
| RSI |
RTC |
Very serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
serious |
Not serious |
- |
97 |
82 |
.13(-.52,
.78) |
Very
Low |
Important |
| SLJ |
RTC |
Very serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
Not serious |
serious |
- |
224 |
190 |
.58(.30,
.83) |
Very
Low |
Critical |
RoB: Risk of bias; Incon: Inconsistency; Indirect: Indirectness; Impre: Imprecision; PubB: Publication bias; Exp: Experimental; VJ= Vertical Jump; SPRINT-P= Sprint Performance; RSI=Reactive strength index; SLJ=Stand long jump; CI: Confidence interval, SMD: Standardized mean difference; According to Cohen'd regulations on effect sizes(Brydges, 2019), SMD=0.2 was set as the minimum clinically important difference (MICD), SMD≥0.8 as a large effect size; a: Risk of bias for included studies, more than 1/3 for some concerns or high risk of bias; b: Risk of bias for included studies, more than 1/2 for some concerns or High risk of bias; c: Heterogeneity assessment I2 ≥ 50%; d: Heterogeneity assessment I2 ≥75%; e: Heterogeneity between subjects, measures and interventions; f: MCID included in the 95% CI portion of the effect size; g: 95% CI of the effect size fully incorporates the MCID.
