This systematic review aimed to synthesize the results of studies that tested the validity, reproducibility, and concordance of the standard methods of mobile applications used to estimate vertical jumps. The search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Twenty studies were included in the systematic review, and 16 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Good to excellent intraclass and interrater reliabilities (84-1.00) were observed for all jumps. The meta-analysis identified a moderating effect on the Bland-Altman bias (p = 0.05), and no moderator effect for jump type (p = 0.51) and reference method (p = 0.90). The Jumpo app overestimated jump height by 1.42 (0.06-2.78) cm, and the MyJump app presented values similar to those of the reference methods (0.0 [-0.23 to 0.22] cm). The data suggest that the vertical jump height estimated using smartphone apps is highly reliable within and across different assessors, irrespective of jump type and app. In addition, the jump height estimated with the MyJump app closely agrees with other standard methods that use flight-time equations. However, we recommend considering the overestimation of jump height when using the Jumpo app compared with the MyJump app.
© Copyright 2025 Strength and Conditioning Journal. National Strength & Conditioning Association. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.