Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17968581›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2008

Validity of criteria for establishing maximal O2 uptake during ramp exercise tests.

David C Poole, Daryl P Wilkerson, Andrew M Jones

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06935903 (Assessment of Physical Capacity and Metabolic Parameters in Marathon Runners With Type 1 Diabetes), which is not on this map. Cited by 150 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
150citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06935903 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Assessment of Physical Capacity and Metabolic Parameters in Marathon Runners With Type 1 Diabetes: an Observational Study

TypeobservationalSponsorPoznan University of Medical SciencesRan2023 to 2023Enrolled10ConditionsType 1 Diabetes (T1D)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

150 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Response of VOPhysiological reports · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

90 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.

David C PooleSchool of Health and Sports Sciences, University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Daryl P Wilkerson
Andrew M Jones

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The incremental or ramp exercise test to the limit of tolerance has become a popular test for determination of maximal O(2) uptake (VO(2max)). However, many subjects do not evidence a definitive plateau of the VO(2) -work rate relationship on this test and secondary criteria based upon respiratory exchange ratio (RER), maximal heart rate (HR(max)) or blood [lactate] have been adopted to provide confidence in the measured VO(2max). We hypothesized that verification of VO(2max) using these variables is fundamentally flawed in that their use could either allow underestimation of VO(2max) (if, for any reason, a test were ended at a sub-maximal [Formula: see text]), or alternatively preclude subjects from recording a valid VO(2max). Eight healthy male subjects completed a ramp exercise test (at 20 W/min) to the limit of tolerance on an electrically braked cycle ergometer during which pulmonary gas exchange was measured breath-by-breath and blood [lactate] was determined every 90 s. Using the most widely used criterion values of RER (1.10 and 1.15), VO(2max) as determined during the ramp test (4.03 +/- 0.10 l/min) could be undermeasured by 27% (2.97 +/- 0.24 l/min) and 16% (3.41 +/- 0.15 l/min), respectively (both P < 0.05). The criteria of HR(max) (age predicted HR(max) +/- 10 b/min) and blood [lactate] (> or = 8 mM) were untenable because they resulted in rejection of 3/8 and 6/8 of the subjects, most of whom (5/8) had demonstrated a plateau of VO(2max) at VO(2max). These findings provide a clear mandate for rejecting these secondary criteria as a means of validating VO(2max) on ramp exercise tests.

Indexed as

AdultExercise TestHeart RateHumansLactic AcidMaleOxygen ConsumptionPhysical ExertionPulmonary Gas ExchangeReproducibility of ResultsLactic Acid

Identifiers

PMID17968581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.