Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24150134›Full record

ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2008

Anaerobic capacity may not be determined by critical power model in elite table tennis players.

Alessandro M Zagatto, Marcelo Papoti, Claudio A Gobatto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Aerobic power and peak power of elite America's Cup sailors.European journal of applied physiology · 2009
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The physiological demands of table tennis: a review.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2013
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Alessandro M ZagattoLaboratory of Research in Exercise Physiology (LAPEFE), Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) , Campo Grande-MS, Brazil ; Laboratory of Applied Physiology to Sport, UNESP, Rio Claro , Brazil.
Marcelo Papoti
Claudio A Gobatto

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to verify the applicability of anaerobic work capacity (AWC) determined from the critical power model in elite table tennis players. Eight male international level table tennis players participated in the study. The tests undertaken were: 1) A critical frequency test used to determinate the anaerobic work capacity; 2) Wingate tests were performed using leg and arm ergometers. AWC corresponded to 99.5 ± 29.1 table tennis balls. AWC was not related to peak (r = -0.25), mean (r = -0.02), relative peak (r = -0.49) or relative mean power (r = 0.01), nor fatigue index (r = -0.52) (Wingate leg ergometer). Similar correlations for peak (r = -0.34), mean (r = -0.04), relative peak (r = -0.49), relative mean power (r = -0.14) and peak blood lactate concentration (r = -0.08) were determined in the Wingate arm ergometer test. Based on these results the AWC determined by a modified critical power test was not a good index for measurement of anaerobic capacity in table tennis players. Key pointsAnaerobic work capacity (AWC) was not good index of anaerobic capacity in table tennis.AWC determined using the table tennis ergometer showed low correlations with the Wingate test measures for cycle and arm ergometry.A sport-specific protocol is required for measuring anaerobic capacity in table tennis.

Indexed as

Anaerobic capacitycritical frequencylactatetable tennisWingate test

Identifiers

PMID24150134
PMCPMC3763352

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.