| Title |
International Paralympic Committee (IPC) and International Blind Sports Federation (IBSA) Joint Position Stand on the Sport-Specific Classification of Athletes with Vision Impairment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-018-0949-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David L. Mann, H. J. C. Ravensbergen |
| Abstract |
Classification is a defining characteristic of para-sports whereby eligible athletes are allocated a sport class to compete against others with similar activity limitations. To account for the unique characteristics of each sport, para-sports should develop their own classification system using evidence that demonstrates the impact of impairment on performance in that sport. Although the move towards sport-specific classification has progressed in sports for athletes with physical and intellectual impairments, sports for athletes with vision impairment (VI) continue to use the same three classes irrespective of the sport, with classes delineated by legal definitions of low vision and blindness. The aim of this joint International Paralympic Committee/International Blind Sports Federation (IPC/IBSA) Position Stand is to provide guidance for how evidence-based sport-specific classification should be achieved in VI sports. It does so by outlining three conceptual research models (correlation, simulation, and component analysis) that can be used to establish both the minimum impairment required to compete plus the appropriate number of sport classes and their inclusion criteria. The present evaluation of vision relies on measures of visual acuity and field, but new criteria may require a sport-specific combination of additional measures of visual function (e.g. contrast, motion, and light sensitivity) to better account for the impact of VI on sport performance. Moreover, the test procedures used during athlete evaluation (e.g. whether to evaluate both eyes individually or together) should be chosen to better represent the habitual viewing situation experienced in that sport. The development of sport-specific criteria should enhance the legitimacy of competition and encourage increased grassroots participation in VI sports. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 25% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 25% |
| Ireland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 126 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 17% |
| Unknown | 47 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 36 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 4% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 59 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2022.
All research outputs
#14,842,255
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#2,481
of 2,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,657
of 340,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#29
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,896 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,750 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.