Consensus on a video analysis framework of descriptors and definitions by the Rugby Union Video Analysis Consensus group

72Citations
Citations of this article
159Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Using an expert consensus-based approach, a rugby union Video Analysis Consensus (RUVAC) group was formed to develop a framework for video analysis research in rugby union. The aim of the framework is to improve the consistency of video analysis work in rugby union and help enhance the overall quality of future research in the sport. To reach consensus, a systematic review and Delphi method study design was used. After a systematic search of the literature, 17 articles were used to develop the final framework that described and defined key actions and events in rugby union (rugby). Thereafter, a group of researchers and practitioners with experience and expertise in rugby video analysis formed the RUVAC group. Each member of the group examined the framework of descriptors and definitions and rated their level of agreement on a 5-point agreement Likert scale (1: strongly disagree; 2: disagree; 3: neither agree or disagree; 4: agree; 5: strongly agree). The mean rating of agreement on the five-point scale (1: strongly disagree; 5: strongly agree) was 4.6 (4.3–4.9), 4.6 (4.4–4.9), 4.7 (4.5–4.9), 4.8 (4.6–5.0) and 4.8 (4.6–5.0) for the tackle, ruck, scrum, line-out and maul, respectively. The RUVAC group recommends using this consensus as the starting framework when conducting rugby video analysis research. Which variables to use (if not all) depends on the objectives of the study. Furthermore, the intention of this consensus is to help integrate video data with other data (eg, injury surveillance).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hendricks, S., Till, K., Hollander, S. den, Savage, Roberts, Tierney, G., … Jones, B. (2020). Consensus on a video analysis framework of descriptors and definitions by the Rugby Union Video Analysis Consensus group. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 54(10), 566–572. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-101293

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free