1. Introduction
articipation in sports activities is increasing, and in addition to its potential benefits, it undoubtedly brings the possibility of injury and negative consequences such as neuromuscular injuries for each person [1]. 10.19% of all acute injuries treated in hospitals are due to participation in sports activities. These sports injuries may impair a person’s athletic performance in later life and limit a person’s ability to perform painless movements, and even these sports injuries can cause the athlete to say goodbye to his sporting profession [2] permanently. Therefore, experts seek screening tests that identify people who are prone to injury to minimize the incidence of sports injuries while participating in sports activities [3, 4]; Therefore, to reduce these sports injuries, tools that have a high accuracy of diagnosis in terms of susceptibility to injury should be used.
The reason why the relationship between Functional Movement Screening (FMS) test scores and physical fitness factors differs, as Moore et al. Showed in their study, can be that when concluding about predicting FMS test injury, many factors must be considered and detailed. Therefore, this study aims to study the relationship between the FMS test and some physical fitness factors in girls who exercise regularly to determine whether screening test scores that examine movement patterns and basal movements are significantly correlated with fitness factors that challenge motor and athletic skills?
2. Methode
This study is correlational, and the statistical population of it consisted of university students in the age group of 18 to 30 years, and according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study, 30 people were randomly selected in the field of physical education. Subjects with no history of injury in the past year and no damage to the visual system, atrium, and the absence of neurological diseases and postural abnormalities (such as lordosis, flat feet, knee braces or cruciate ligament, etc.) affected the research process. All subjects agreed to participate in this study. According to the sources, athletes exercised at least three sessions a week, one to one and a half hours per session [17].
The FMS (ICC=0.89) tests of Cook et al. were used in functional screening research [18]. In this study, descriptive statistics were used to describe each group’s data (age, height, weight, and body mass index) and describe the data, and the Mean±SD was used. Shaper Wilk test was used to check the normality of the data. Since the data were averaged, the Pearson correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between the FMS test scores and fitness factors and multivariate regression to determine the linear regression equation. All data were collected in SPSS V. 22, and the significance level in this study was considered P≥0.05.
3. Results
Table 1 shows the Pearson correlation test results between the functional screening test’s total score with some fitness factors. 


According to these results, there is no significant relationship between the functional screening test scores and the measured fitness factors.
4. Discussion and Conclussion
This study aimed to investigate the relationship between the FMS test and some fitness factors of female student-athletes
The results of the study showed that the measured fitness factors did not have a significant relationship with the FMS test’s total score. We discuss the relationship between each of the measured fitness factors and the total FMS test score. 
However, this study had some limitations, including not examining the relationship between each item of the FMS test and any fitness tests to evaluate the study results more accurately. Also, do not examine whether gender is involved in the relationship between fitness factors and FMS score (Table 2). 


Therefore, it is suggested each item of the FMS test be examined with fitness factors and the role of gender, and the difference between the subjects.This study concluded no significant relationship between the FMS test and fitness factors’ total score. The FMS test considers the quality of movements and basic movements, and the fitness factors take into account sports skills. Each of these tests pursues different goals; therefore, explaining the fitness factors using the FMS test’s total score is not possible.

Ethical Considerations
Compliance with ethical guidelines
All ethical principles are considered in this article. The participants were informed about the purpose of the research and its implementation stages. They were also assured about the confidentiality of their information and were free to leave the study whenever they wished, and if desired, the research results would be available to them.

Funding
This research did not receive any grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or non-profit sectors. 

Authors' contributions
All authors equally contributed to preparing this article.

Conflicts of interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements
All authors would like to thank the Faculty of Physical Education, University of Guilan.

References

1. Caine DJ, Provance AJ. Pediatric and adolescent injury in adventure and extreme sports. Res Sports Med. 2018; 26(suppl 1):5-19. [DOI:10.1080/15438627.2018.1434041] [PMID]
2. Patel DR, Yamasaki A, Brown K. Epidemiology of sports-related musculoskeletal injuries in young athletes in United States. Transl Pediatr. 2017; 6(3):160-6. [DOI:10.21037/tp.2017.04.08] [PMID] [PMCID]
3. Bakken A, Targett S, Bere T, Eirale C, Farooq A, Tol JL, et al. The functional movement test 9+ is a poor screening test for lower extremity injuries in professional male football players: A 2-year prospective cohort study. Br J Sports Med. 2018; 52(16):1047-53. [DOI:10.1136/bjsports-2016-097307] [PMID]
4. Walbright PD, Walbright N, Ojha H, Davenport T. Validity of functional screening tests to predict lost-time lower quarter injury in a cohort of female collegiate athletes. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2017; 12(6):948-59. [DOI:10.26603/ijspt20170948] [PMID] [PMCID]
5. Bonazza NA, Smuin D, Onks CA, Silvis ML, Dhawan A. Reliability, validity, and injury predictive value of the functional movement screen: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2017; 45(3):725-32. [DOI:10.1177/0363546516641937] [PMID]
6. Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom B. Pre-participation screening: The use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function - part 1. N Am J Sports Phys Ther: NAJSPT. 2006; 1(2):62-72. [PMID] [PMCID]
7. Monaco J-T, Schoenfeld BJ. A review of the current literature on the utility of the functional movement screen as a screening tool to identify athletes’ risk for injury. Strength  Cond J. 2019; 41(5):17-23. [DOI:10.1519/SSC.0000000000000481]
8. Dyer CS, Callister R, Sanctuary CE, Snodgrass SJ. Functional Movement Screening and injury risk in elite adolescent rugby league players. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2019; 14(4):498-506. [DOI:10.1177/1747954119853650]
9. Dossa K, Cashman G, Howitt S, West B, Murray N. Can injury in major junior hockey players be predicted by a pre-season functional movement screen-a prospective cohort study. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2014; 58(4):421-7. [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Moran RW, Schneiders AG, Mason J, Sullivan SJ. Do Functional Movement Screen (FMS) composite scores predict subsequent injury? A systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2017; 51(23):1661-9. [DOI:10.1136/bjsports-2016-096938] [PMID]
11. Dorrel BS, Long T, Shaffer S, Myer GD. Evaluation of the functional movement screen as an injury prediction tool among active adult populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Health. 2015; 7(6):532-7. [DOI:10.1177/1941738115607445] [PMID] [PMCID]
12. Moore E, Chalmers S, Milanese S, Fuller JT. Factors influencing the relationship between the functional movement screen and injury risk in sporting populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2019; 49(9):1449-63. [DOI:10.1007/s40279-019-01126-5] [PMID]
13. Emery CA. Risk factors for injury in child and adolescent sport: A systematic review of the literature. Clin J Sport Med. 2003; 13(4):256-68. [DOI:10.1097/00042752-200307000-00011] [PMID]
14. Okada T, Huxel KC, Nesser TW. Relationship between core stability, functional movement, and performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2011; 25(1):252-61. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b22b3e] [PMID]
15. Lockie RG, Schultz AB, Callaghan SJ, Jordan CA, Luczo TM, Jeffriess MD. A preliminary investigation into the relationship between functional movement screen scores and athletic physical performance in female team sport athletes. Biol Sport. 2015; 32(1):41-51. [DOI:10.5604/20831862.1127281] [PMID] [PMCID]
16. Parchmann CJ, McBride JM. Relationship between functional movement screen and athletic performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2011; 25(12):3378-84. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318238e916] [PMID]
17. Rejali M, Mostajeran M. Assessment of physical activity in medical and public health students. J Educ Health Promot. 2013; 2:19. [DOI:10.4103/2277-9531.112690] [PMID] [PMCID]
18. Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom BJ, Voight M. Functional Movement Screening: The use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function - part 2. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014; 9(4):549-63. [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Ayán-Pérez C, Cancela-Carral JM, Lago-Ballesteros J, Martínez-Lemos I. Reliability of sargent jump test in 4-to 5-year-old children. Percept Mot Skills. 2017; 124(1):39-57. [DOI:10.1177/0031512516676174] [PMID]
20. Sever O. [Comparison of static and dynamic core exercises’ effects on Stork balance test in soccer players (Turkish)]. J Hum Sci. 2017; 14(2):1781-91. [DOI:10.14687/jhs.v14i2.4440]
21. Plisky PJ, Gorman PP, Butler RJ, Kiesel KB, Underwood FB, Elkins B. The reliability of an instrumented device for measuring components of the star excursion balance test. N Am J Sports Phys Ther: NAJSPT. 2009; 4(2):92-9. [PMID] [PMCID]
22. Juan-Recio C, López-Plaza D, Barbado Murillo D, García-Vaquero MP, Vera-García FJ. Reliability assessment and correlation analysis of 3 protocols to measure trunk muscle strength and endurance. J Sports Sci. 2018; 36(4):357-64. [DOI:10.1080/02640414.2017.1307439] [PMID]
23. Applegate ME, France CR, Russ DW, Leitkam ST, Thomas JS. Sørensen test performance is driven by different physiological and psychological variables in participants with and without recurrent low back pain. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2019; 44:1-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.jelekin.2018.11.006] [PMID]
24. Zou L. Relationship between Functional Movement Screening and skill-related fitness in college students. Int J Sports Sci. 2016; 6(1):11-8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301649064_Relationship_between_Functional_Movement_Screening_and_Skill-Related_Fitness_in_College_Students
25. Parchmann CJ, McBride JM. Relationship between Functional Movement Screen and athletic performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2011; 25(12):3378-84. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318238e916] [PMID]
26. Butler RJ, Plisky PJ, Southers C, Scoma C, Kiesel KB. Biomechanical analysis of the different classifications of the Functional Movement Screen deep squat test. Sports Biomech. 2010; 9(4):270-9. [DOI:10.1080/14763141.2010.539623] [PMID]
27. Li Y, Wang X, Chen X, Dai B. Exploratory factor analysis of the Functional Movement Screen in elite athletes. J Sports Sci. 2015; 33(11):1166-72. [DOI:10.1080/02640414.2014.986505] [PMID]
28. Hartigan EH, Lawrence M, Bisson BM, Torgerson E, Knight RC. Relationship of the functional movement screen in-line lunge to power, speed, and balance measures. Sports Health. 2014; 6(3):197-202. [DOI:10.1177/1941738114522412] [PMID] [PMCID]
29. Ashdown SC. Relationship between stabilization, balance, athletic performance and functional movement [MSc. thesis]. 2013; Vereinigte Staaten: Brigham Young University. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4694&context=etd
30. Chimera NJ, Smith CA, Warren M. Injury history, sex, and performance on the functional movement screen and Y balance test. J Athl Train. 2015; 50(5):475-85. [DOI:10.4085/1062-6050-49.6.02] [PMID] [PMCID]
31. Kazman JB, Galecki JM, Lisman P, Deuster PA, O’Connor FG. Factor structure of the functional movement screen in marine officer candidates. J Strength Cond Res. 2014; 28(3):672-8. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182a6dd83] [PMID]
32. Bagherian S, Ghasempoor K, Rahnama N, Wikstrom EA. The effect of core stability training on functional movement patterns in college athletes. J Sport Rehabil. 2019; 28(5):444-9. [DOI:10.1123/jsr.2017-0107] [PMID]
33. Mitchell UH, Johnson AW, Adamson B. Relationship between functional movement screen scores, core strength, posture, and body mass index in school children in Moldova. J Strength Cond Res. 2015; 29(5):1172-9. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000722] [PMID]
34. Cornell DJ, Gnacinski SL, Zamzow A, Mims J, Ebersole KT. Measures of health, fitness, and functional movement among firefighter recruits. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2017; 23(2):198-204. [DOI:10.1080/10803548.2016.1187001] [PMID]