ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2008
Evaluation of a cycling pre-load time trial protocol in recreationally active humans.
Article 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. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of Ingesting an Oral Rehydration Solution after Exercise on Fluid Balance and Endurance Performance.Nutrients · 2020Trial
- Improvements in Cycling but Not Handcycling 10 km Time Trial Performance in Habitual Caffeine Users.Nutrients · 2016Trial
- Effect of ambient temperature on caffeine ergogenicity during endurance exercise.European journal of applied physiology · 2011Trial
- What is a cycling race simulation anyway: a review on protocols to assess durability in cycling.European journal of applied physiology · 2025Review
- Deception of ambient and body core temperature improves self paced cycling in hot, humid conditions.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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for greater sensitivity in exercise performance measures is of particular importance in nutritional intervention studies and such measures have been investigated in trained cyclists, but not in those who have no experience of laboratory testing and/or the need to pace their effort. The aim of the present study was to evaluate a mixed design approach (constant load then time-trial) endurance type cycle ergometer protocol using recreationally active participants not well accustomed to cycling. Seven participants including one female (age 25 +/- 5 years; body mass 74.4 +/- 9.3 kg; peak VO(2) 3.91 +/- 0.96 l) completed four repeat cycle tests. The test consisted of a "pre-load" (60 min at 65% of peak VO(2)) followed by a 20 min time trial (performance measure). Reliability for the performance measure was assessed by calculating the individual participant coefficient of variation (CV) and a mean CV for the group. Excluding a familiarisation trial, mean CV for the group was 3.4% (95% confidence interval between 2.0 and 10.1%). It is concluded that the performance test described can be used in recreationally active young adults with lower variation after one familiarisation trial. The protocol might be used to evaluate an intervention if changes in performance are expected to be greater than 3.4%, or greater than around 7% if a signal to noise ratio of 2: 1 was to be considered appropriate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18043936What 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.