ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2006
Validity of the two-parameter model in estimating the anaerobic work capacity.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of methods to quantify aerobic-anaerobic energy contributions during sports and exercise - a systematic review and best-evidence synthesis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Pooled it
- Critical velocity, anaerobic distance capacity, maximal instantaneous velocity and aerobic inertia in sprint and endurance young swimmers.European journal of applied physiology · 2010Trial
- Anaerobic work capacity in cycling: the effect of computational method.European journal of applied physiology · 2022Article
- A survey of mathematical models of human performance using power and energy.Sports medicine - open · 2019Review
- Article
- Complex network models reveal correlations among network metrics, exercise intensity and role of body changes in the fatigue process.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Validity and reliability of critical power field testing.European journal of applied physiology · 2015Article
- Similarity in physiological and perceived exertion responses to exercise at continuous and intermittent critical power.European journal of applied physiology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The curvature of the power-time (P-t) relationship (W') has been suggested to be constant when exercising above critical power (CP) and to represent the anaerobic work capacity (AWC). The aim of this study was to compare W' to (1) the total amount of work performed above CP (W (90s)') and (2) the AWC, both determined from a 90s all-out fixed cadence test. Fourteen participants (age 30.5 +/- 6.5 years; body mass 67.8 +/- 10.3 kg), following an incremental VO(2max) ramp protocol, performed three constant load exhaustion tests set at 103 +/- 3, 97 +/- 3 and 90 +/- 2% P-VO(2max) to calculate W' from the P-t relationship. Two 90s all-out efforts were also undertaken to determine W (90s)' (power output-time integral above CP) and AWC (power output-time integral above the power output expected from the measured VO(2)). W' (13.6 +/- 1.3 kJ) and W (90s)' (13.9 +/- 1.1 kJ; P = 0.96) were not significantly different but were lower than AWC (15.9 +/- 1.2 kJ) by 24% (P = 0.03) and 17%, respectively (P = 0.04). All these variables were correlated (P < 0.001) but great extents of disagreement were reported (0.2 +/- 6.4 kJ between W' and W (90s)', 2.3 +/- 7.2 kJ between W' and AWC, and 2.1 +/- 4.3 kJ between W (90s)' and AWC). The underestimation of AWC from both W' and W (90s)' can be explained by the aerobic inertia not taking into consideration when determining the two latter variables. The low extents of agreement between W', W (90s)' and AWC mean the terms should not be used interchangeably.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16261386What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.