Rugby Sevens sRPE Workload Imputation Using Objective Models of Measurement
While accurate athlete load monitoring is crucial for preventing injury and optimizing performance, the commonly used session rating of perceived exertion training load or competition load method faces limitations due to compliance issues related to missing subjective data self-reported by the athle...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/12/6520 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | While accurate athlete load monitoring is crucial for preventing injury and optimizing performance, the commonly used session rating of perceived exertion training load or competition load method faces limitations due to compliance issues related to missing subjective data self-reported by the athlete and the subsequent challenges in imputing the sessional rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) component, an average value for a training or competition session. This study investigated the imputation of missing RPE scores from the mechanical work and from a Speed–Deceleration–Contact (SDC) model. A total of 1002 datasets were collected from women’s rugby sevens competitions. Using either the mechanical work or SDC, linear regression and random forest imputation models were assessed at different missingness levels and their results compared to those of a common method of daily team mean substitution (DTMS) using an ANOVA of the accuracy by the model type and missingness. The statistical equivalence was evaluated for true and imputed sRPE scores by the model and strategy. Significant interactions between the model type and missingness were found, with all the imputed scores being deemed statistically equivalent. From the ANOVA, DTMS was found to be the poorest-performing model and the random forest model was the best. However, the best-performing model was not superior to previously reported imputation approaches, which confirms the difficulty in using subjective measures of the load when missing data is a prevalent issue in team sports. Practitioners are encouraged to critically evaluate any method of imputation for an athlete’s load. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2076-3417 |