Reliability and Validity of the Polar V800 Sports Watch for Estimating Vertical Jump Height
Manuel-Vicente Garnacho-Casta\~no, Marcos Faundez-Zanuy, Noemi, Serra-Pay\'a, J. L. Mat\'e-Mu\~noz, Josep L\'opez-Xarbau, M. Vila-Blanch

TL;DR
This study evaluates the Polar V800 sports watch's reliability and validity in measuring vertical jump height, demonstrating it as a valid and reliable tool comparable to gold-standard devices in healthy young men.
Contribution
It provides the first comprehensive assessment of the Polar V800's measurement accuracy and consistency for vertical jump height in a controlled setting.
Findings
High test-retest reliability with ICCs around 0.90
No significant bias between Polar V800 and force platform
Almost perfect agreement with force platform in vertical jump measurements
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Polar V800 to measure vertical jump height. Twenty-two physically active healthy men (age: 22.89 +- 4.23 years; body mass: 70.74 +- 8.04 kg; height: 1.74 +- 0.76 m) were recruited for the study. The reliability was evaluated by comparing measurements acquired by the Polar V800 in two identical testing sessions one week apart. Validity was assessed by comparing measurements simultaneously obtained using a force platform (gold standard), high-speed camera and the Polar V800 during squat jump (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ) tests. In the test-retest reliability, high intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were observed (mean: 0.90, SJ and CMJ) in the Polar V800. There was no significant systematic bias +- random errors (p > 0.05) between test-retest. Low coefficients of variation (<5%) were detected in both jumps in the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
