Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2011
Effect of "Pose" cycling on efficiency and pedaling mechanics.
Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bone morphology and physical characteristics of the pro-cyclist hip joint.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- How to assess performance in cycling: the multivariate nature of influencing factors and related indicators.Frontiers in physiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of "Pose" cycling (a combination of specific bicycle setup and pedaling technique) on metabolic efficiency and pedaling mechanics. Eighteen recreational cyclists were tested for efficiency and pedaling mechanics during steady-state cycling (90% gas-exchange threshold) using two different bicycle setups (preferred and "Pose") and three different pedaling rates (70, 90 and 110 rpm). Nine of the participants underwent a coaching intervention (4 × 1 h) consisting of drills based on the "Pose" instruction manual. The remaining nine participants did not receive an intervention. All participants were tested before and after the intervention period. Analyses of variance were performed to test the independent effects of the "Pose"-specific bicycle setup and pedaling technique on gross efficiency and pedaling mechanics. The "Pose"-specific bicycle setup resulted in increased gross efficiency at each pedaling rate compared to the participants' preferred bicycle position (P < 0.05). This increase in efficiency was accompanied by a significant increase in trunk frontal area (P < 0.05). The coaching intervention resulted in decreased gross efficiency at 110 rpm (P < 0.05); at this pedaling rate the intervention resulted in a slight increase in the non-muscular contribution to pedal power in the experimental group and a decrease in the control group. The combination of changed bicycle setup and pedaling technique had no effect on gross efficiency and only small effects on pedaling mechanics. Our findings add to a growing body of literature that short-term interventions in pedaling technique can change pedaling mechanics but do not improve efficiency during steady-state cycling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.