Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12196030›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2002

Methods to determine aerobic endurance.

Laurent Bosquet, Luc Léger, Patrick Legros

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

76 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 274 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Reliability and validity of the respiratory threshold method.European journal of applied physiology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Cognitive correlates of human endurance.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Durability as an independent parameter of endurance performance in cycling.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Laurent BosquetFaculty of Sport Sciences and Physical Education, University of Lille, Ronchin, France. lbosquet@mailsc.univ-lille2.fr
Luc Léger
Patrick Legros
Université Côte d'Azur · FRUniversité de Lille · FRUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physiological testing of elite athletes requires the correct identification and assessment of sports-specific underlying factors. It is now recognised that performance in long-distance events is determined by maximal oxygen uptake (V(2 max)), energy cost of exercise and the maximal fractional utilisation of V(2 max) in any realised performance or as a corollary a set percentage of V(2 max) that could be endured as long as possible. This later ability is defined as endurance, and more precisely aerobic endurance, since V(2 max) sets the upper limit of aerobic pathway. It should be distinguished from endurance ability or endurance performance, which are synonymous with performance in long-distance events. The present review examines methods available in the literature to assess aerobic endurance. They are numerous and can be classified into two categories, namely direct and indirect methods. Direct methods bring together all indices that allow either a complete or a partial representation of the power-duration relationship, while indirect methods revolve around the determination of the so-called anaerobic threshold (AT). With regard to direct methods, performance in a series of tests provides a more complete and presumably more valid description of the power-duration relationship than performance in a single test, even if both approaches are well correlated with each other. However, the question remains open to determine which systems model should be employed among the several available in the literature, and how to use them in the prescription of training intensities. As for indirect methods, there is quantitative accumulation of data supporting the utilisation of the AT to assess aerobic endurance and to prescribe training intensities. However, it appears that: there is no unique intensity corresponding to the AT, since criteria available in the literature provide inconsistent results; and the non-invasive determination of the AT using ventilatory and heart rate data instead of blood lactate concentration ([La(-)](b)) is not valid. Added to the fact that the AT may not represent the optimal training intensity for elite athletes, it raises doubt on the usefulness of this theory without questioning, however, the usefulness of the whole [La(-)](b)-power curve to assess aerobic endurance and predict performance in long-distance events.

Indexed as

Exercise ToleranceExerciseExercise TestHeart RateHumansLactatesOxygen ConsumptionRespirationSportsTask Performance and AnalysisLactates

Identifiers

PMID12196030
OpenAlexW2102226733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.