Hoping for the best, prepared for the worst: can we perform remote data collection in sport sciences?

INTRODUCTION

The current COVID-19 pandemic has challenged all professional field areas and established social distancing behaviors and stay-at-home measures as the “new normal.” Mandatory quarantine at some points in time also changed health care services, which required alternative approaches for health care procedures, such as telemedicine appointments (1), aiming to reduce the risk of virus transmission. Just as the COVID-19 pandemic changed the way health care was provided, it may be time to rethink new possibilities for data acquisition and research designs in sport sciences.

From a sports perspective, all forms of organized competition have either been canceled or deferred, such as the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games (2). Furthermore, the postponement of face-to-face activities and the closure of universities and research centers have impacted the entire research system related to sports. The evident issue is the lack of the possibility of conducting face-to-face data collection due to direct contact with volunteers, causing the interruption of many researchers’ work (3). Some questions have arisen: 1) Can we perform data acquisition in sport sciences remotely? 2) Do some procedures exclusively require researchers to have direct contact with volunteers? 3) Would the robustness of the findings be compromised? 4) After this pandemic state, will we improve (or repeat) old practices for data acquisition? In this context, it is necessary to reflect on these issues.

It is not possible to predict exactly when humanity will have another pandemics like the COVID-19 pandemic; zoonotic emerging infectious disease (pathogen transmission by animals) through viral or bacterial infection will probably occur in the future as a new pandemic (4). Therefore, it is crucial to be prepared for the worst. Hence, we briefly discuss possibilities related to data acquisition in sport sciences and highlight remote assessments in an online scenario.

COULD WE CONDUCT EXPERIMENTS AND DATA ACQUISITION REMOTELY IN SPORT SCIENCES?

The recruitment of volunteers, data collection, and grant applications are some of the intrinsic challenges of research (3), which have been largely affected by the pandemic and required changes in the way of doing science. Clinical trials that were already being executed had to be changed, which encouraged the administration of interventions at home and remote monitoring of volunteers (5).

The current technological revolution is fabulous and requires the full incorporation of the available tools/approaches to aid research practices. Furthermore, remote approaches could also enable advances in inherent research practices, such as training investigators for different types of experimental designs, validating methods, follow-up interventions, or perhaps reducing volunteer dropouts.

For example, Tanaka et al. (6) reported that remote assessments in orthopedics, such as range of motion, hyperextension, flexion, and joint rotation measurements, can be obtained with the aid of a web-based goniometer through a virtual assessment. In addition, strength tests against gravity can be performed for all muscle groups. Corroborating these prior results, Mani et al. (7) aimed to verify the validity and reliability of an internet-based physical therapy assessment for musculoskeletal conditions. They considered technically feasible remote assessments with good concurrent validity and reliability for measuring pain, swelling, range of motion, muscle strength, balance, gait, and functional capacity. In addition, other potentially eligible appraisals are measurements of blood glucose, blood pressure, pulse, and step count per day/week that can be performed by an individual at home (8) with automatized devices. It is worth noting that, to be commercialized, the validity and accuracy of self-measurement equipment must be regulated by specific standards from worldwide or country agencies. In addition, an easy way to reduce measurement variability could be the use of the same model of equipment. There are current technologies that enable data acquisition to be done remotely (Fig. 1). To allow this, a cooperative procedure between the tester and participant must be crucial and a key factor.

Figure 1.

Schematic representation of the remote data acquisition proposal. Current data collection practices are carried out in a face-to-face manner, involving several professionals (e.g., doctors, scientists, technicians, and students) during physical, clinical, or psychometric tests. The COVID-19 pandemic established social distancing as the “new normal,” and the use of technologies became widely necessary for online remote activities, such as school, working from home, meetings, and shopping. With the possibility of incorporating remote data collection in sport sciences, under a previous synchronous or asynchronous virtual orientation, submaximal tests that are also valid for estimating numerous outcome variables could be performed online. Furthermore, with the help of smart technologies (which expand the scope of the collected variables) and an experimental approach that aims to minimize biases, an evolution in data collection would be initiated.

DO ALL PROCEDURES NECESSARILY REQUIRE DIRECT CONTACT BETWEEN RESEARCHERS AND VOLUNTEERS?

There are certain experimental designs and protocols that do not require direct in-person contact between researchers and subjects during data collection processes (Fig. 1), allowing certain independence for the volunteer. Some procedures for determining body mass, height, pulse, or even the estimation of maximal oxygen consumption (V̇o_2max) based on previous virtual oriented instruction would be possible to be perform remotely. Regarding the healthy population, some procedures could be self-performed, expanding the possibility of interventions and evaluation of results.

Many laboratory tests (e.g., 1RM, progressive treadmill tests) require expert technical face-to-face guidance. However, submaximal tests for estimating most of the interesting outcomes have also been validated and widely accepted, enabling reliable remote execution. For example, cardiorespiratory fitness can be assessed through self-performed submaximal tests. Good ability of submaximal step tests for V̇o_2max estimation has been demonstrated, which may be an acceptable approach for use in a variety of scenarios (9), with preliminary empirical evidence of their online application already available (10).

Regarding maximal dynamic muscle strength, approaches for estimating the 1RM by performing repetitions until fatigue (11, 12), which minimize the limitations of the maximal test (e.g., inexperience of the volunteer, high loads, and the possibility of injury), may be another possible approach that can be performed remotely.

In addition, technological advances related to health, smart technologies, mobile devices, and their various online apps, as well as wearable technologies, are also widely present in the daily lives of individuals (13), which could expand the scope of collected information. Data instantly acquired by these smartphones and wearable devices that include behavioral and physiological variables (14) can help professionals and research practices. The synchronization of these ranges of data collected by some wearable devices (e.g., the number of steps, distance covered, heart rate, speed, and calories burned) is easily possible with fitness apps (e.g., Strava) for further analysis.

WOULD BE THE ROBUSTNESS OF THE FINDINGS BE COMPROMISED?

Currently, the feasibility of remote data acquisition in the sport sciences field is unexplored and potentially not exempt from risk. However, it is possible to learn from the experiences of other fields. With the advent of telemedicine and telerehabilitation, much experience can be obtained so that remote approaches can be possible in the practice of research in the sport sciences in the near future. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic situation is likely to be a historic event for remote health-related activities (15), with great potential for evolution. Some practical recommendations on remote assessments in this context are already available (6, 8) and can be a point of departure for standardized practices. Moreover, outside the pandemic context, remote approaches could be acceptable in different contexts, ranging from the possibility of a greater sample range, time, and financial cost savings, integration between research centers, longitudinal studies, etc.

On the other hand, perhaps the robustness of data through remote participation can be a concern of the same proportion as other biases with which researchers seek to standardize in their interventions (16). In addition, a type of remote data acquisition, such as online questionnaires and surveys, is already widespread and commonly present in various research fields (16).

AFTER THIS PANDEMIC STATE, WILL WE MODIFY (OR REPEAT) OLD PRACTICES FOR DATA ACQUISITION?

The question is not whether to abandon standard methods of data collection but to broaden the debate about the administration of new perspectives, specifically with the use of newly available technologies. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic context will leave a legacy. The changes in daily life behaviors have stimulated new reflections, considering whether face-to-face data collection protocols could be adapted and/or changed to improve studies of sport sciences. As future directions, we encourage researchers to consider study designs that shift protocols from laboratories to online environments to empirically analyze these methods and their viability in comparison with face-to-face data collection.

Studies are also needed to verify the validity of data from smart devices and wearable technologies (14). Relevant questions related to ethics, legal liability, and security also need to be answered (14) and followed.

Considering performing data acquisition remotely in a broader perspective, multicenter studies with larger and more distinct samples could be feasible. Multicentric studies have great internal and external validity, but they are scarce in sport sciences (17), irrespective of whether they are prospective (18) or observational studies (19). As a result, remote assessments could become a reality, allowing models to be integrated in study centers, collecting data in several locations with the same methodological standards.

Finally, both approaches have pros and cons that must be considered: face-to-face research encompasses social interactions and technical guidance in person and allows for a more controlled environment. Conversely, the dropout rate is common, and volunteers may have to deal with frequent trips to the laboratory site. Remote data collection, in our proposal, could be more affordable by allowing participation in a study outside of an individual’s locality, reducing the financial cost of research, and requiring minimal physical contact (considering potential virus dissemination). However, such issues regarding inexperience, internet connectivity, or even volunteer mistakes leading to noncompliance with the full protocol could emerge.

Capabilities and tools for performing assessments and data collection remotely are available. We just need to use them. Final remark: just in case, we will be better prepared for a new lockdown situation.

DISCLOSURES

No conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the authors.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

H.L.R.S. and M.M. conceived and designed research; A.M. and G.B.C. prepared figures; H.L.R.S., B.P.B., E.O.d.P., and R.A.A. drafted manuscript; H.L.R.S., A.M., G.B.C., G.R.M., and M.M. edited and revised manuscript; H.L.R.S., B.P.B., E.O.d.P., R.A.A., A.M., G.B.C., G.R.M., and M.M. approved final version of manuscript.