Work overview

Section 04 of 06

On the Appropriate Use of Prediction Intervals

Authors’ Reply to “Comment on: Effects of the FIFA 11+ Program on Physical Fitness in Youth and Adult Soccer Players: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis”

Ibnu Noufal Kambitta Valappil, Karuppasamy Govindasamy, Gavoutamane Vasanthi, Masilamani Elayaraja, Cain C. T. Clark, Koulla Parpa, Borko Katanic, Hüseyin Şahin Uysal, Hassane Zouhal, and Urs Granacher · 2026

Contents

Section 04 of 06

  1. 01Pooling of Measures Within the Dynamic Balance Meta-analysis
  2. 02Pooling of Measures Within the Change-of-Direction Speed Meta-analysis
  3. 03Pooling of Vertical-Jump Metrics
  4. 04On the Appropriate Use of Prediction Intervals
  5. 05Summary
  6. 06Supplementary Information
Text size
Work overview

Section 4 of 6

On the Appropriate Use of Prediction Intervals

Ibnu Noufal Kambitta Valappil, Karuppasamy Govindasamy, Gavoutamane Vasanthi, Masilamani Elayaraja, Cain C. T. Clark, Koulla Parpa, Borko Katanic, Hüseyin Şahin Uysal, Hassane Zouhal, and Urs Granacher · about 1 minutes

We share the colleagues’ enthusiasm for the reporting of 95% prediction intervals (PIs) alongside confidence intervals [23]. We note, however, that the PIs reported in the commentary’s sensitivity analyses (for example, − 1.59 to 2.99 for dynamic balance, − 1.44 to 0.50 for COD, − 0.91 to 1.53 for Sargent jump) reflect expected variability across contexts rather than absence of effect. They are therefore not grounds for dismissing the substantive conclusions.