RESUMEN
Background: In Paralympic sports, classification of athletes based on the impact of impairments on the ability to perform is needed, to prevent a one-sided and predictable outcome of the competition in which the least impaired athlete has the best chance to win. Classification is developing from expert opinion based to evidence based. In wheelchair court sports, there is evidence to support the impact of impairment on wheeled mobility, but not on ball handling. To assess the impact of impairment on the ability to perform ball-handling activities, standardised tests for ball handling are needed. Purpose: To assess if reliable and valid standardised tests for the measurement of ball-handling proficiency in a wheelchair or able-bodied court sports exist; to assist in the development of Evidence-Based Classification (EBC) in wheelchair court sports according to the guidelines of the International Paralympic Committee (IPC). Methods: The review was conducted according to the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement. Search terms used were "wheelchair," "ball," "ball sports," "test," and "performance." Databases searched were Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Sport Discus. Study quality was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist. Results: Twenty-two articles were included. Foundational Movement Skills in ball-handling proficiency were assessed. Tests for throwing maximal distance showed sufficient reliability and validity. Precision in throwing showed low-to-moderate reliability and conflicting results in validity. Throwing techniques differed between studies. Dribbling the ball showed high reliability, but conflicting results in validity. Conclusions: Tests for throwing maximal distance, throwing precision, and dribbling the ball can be used in standardised tests for activity limitation in wheelchair court sports. However, tests need to be adapted and standardised and then reassessed for reliability and validity in athletes with and without arm impairment.
RESUMEN
Increased awareness and understanding of current practices in translational research is required for informed decision making in drug development. This paper describes a systematic review of methotrexate for rheumatoid arthritis, comparing trial design between 147 animal and 512 human studies. Animal studies generally included fewer subjects than human studies, and less frequently reported randomisation and blinding. In relation to life span, study duration was comparable for animals and humans, but included animals were younger than included humans. Animal studies often comprised males only (61%), human studies always included females (98% included both sexes). Power calculations were poorly reported in both samples. Analyses of human studies more frequently comprised Chi-square tests, those of animal studies more frequently reported analyses of variance. Administration route was more variable, and more frequently reported in animal than human studies. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and c-reactive protein were analysed more frequently in human than in animal studies. To conclude, experimental designs for animal and human studies are not optimally aligned. However, methotrexate is effective in treating rheumatoid arthritis in animal models and humans. Further evaluation of the available evidence in other research fields is needed to increase the understanding of translational success before we can optimise translational strategies.