Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21687996›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2012

Aerobic fitness testing in 6- to 9-year-old children: reliability and validity of a modified Yo-Yo IR1 test and the Andersen test.

T Ahler, M Bendiksen, P Krustrup, N Wedderkopp

Abstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. VALIDITY OF FIELD TESTS TO ESTIMATE CARDIORESPIRATORY FITNESS IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

T AhlerDepartment of Physiotherapy, University College Lillebaelt, Blangstedgårdsvej 4, 5220 Odense SØ, Denmark. thah@ucl.dk
M Bendiksen
P Krustrup
N Wedderkopp

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study analysed the reliability and validity of two intermittent running tests (the Yo-Yo IR1 test and the Andersen test) as tools for estimating VO(2max) in children under the age of 10. Two groups, aged 6-7 years (grade 0, n = 18) and 8-9 years (grade 2, n = 16), carried out two repetitions of a modified Yo-Yo IR1 test (2 × 16 m) and the Andersen test, as well as an incremental treadmill test, to directly determine the VO(2max). No significant differences were observed in test-retest performance of the Yo-Yo IR1 test [693 ± 418 (±SD) and 670 ± 328 m, r (2) = 0.79, CV = 19%, p > 0.05, n = 32) and the Andersen test (988 ± 77 and 989 ± 87 m, r (2) = 0.86, CV = 3%, p > 0.05, n = 31). The Yo-Yo IR1 (r (2) = 0.47, n = 31, p < 0.002) and Andersen test performance (r (2) = 0.53, n = 32, p < 0.001) correlated with the VO(2max). Yo-Yo IR1 performance correlated with Andersen test performance (r (2) = 0.74, n = 32, p < 0.0001). In conclusion, the Yo-Yo IR1 and the Andersen tests are reproducible and can be used as an indicator of aerobic fitness for 6- to 9-year-old children.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAlgorithmsAthletic PerformanceChildExerciseExercise TestFemaleHumansMaleOxygen ConsumptionPhysical EndurancePhysical FitnessReproducibility of ResultsRunning

Identifiers

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.