ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2014
The validity of the Moxus Modular metabolic system during incremental exercise tests: impacts on detection of small changes in oxygen consumption.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of dynamic bioenergetic model for intermittent ergometer cycling.European journal of applied physiology · 2023Article
- Comparison of a Continuous and Discontinuous GXT on VOInternational journal of exercise science · 2022Article
- Impact of catheterization on shear-mediated arterial dilation in healthy young men.European journal of applied physiology · 2020Article
- Reliability and Validation of the Hexoskin Wearable Bio-Collection Device During Walking Conditions.International journal of exercise science · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe investigated the accuracy of the Moxus Modular Metabolic System (MOXUS) against the Douglas Bag Method (DBM) during high-intensity exercise, and whether the two methods agreed when detecting small changes in [Formula: see text] between two consecutive workloads ([Formula: see text]).
methodsTwelve trained male runners performed two maximal incremental running tests while gas exchange was analyzed simultaneously by the two systems using a serial setup for four consecutive intervals of 30 s on each test. Comparisons between methods were performed for [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], fractions of expired O2 (FeO2) and CO2 (FeCO2) and [Formula: see text].
resultsThe MOXUS produced significant higher (mean ± SD, n = 54) readings for [Formula: see text] (80 ± 200 mL min(-1), p = 0.005) and [Formula: see text] (2.9 ± 4.2 L min(-1), p < 0.0001), but not FeO2 (-0.01 ± 0.09). Log-transformed 95 % limits of agreement for readings between methods were 94-110 % for [Formula: see text], 97-108 % for [Formula: see text] and 99-101 % for FeO2. [Formula: see text] for two consecutive measurements was not different between systems (120 ± 110 vs. 90 ± 190 mL min(-1) for MOXUS and DBM, respectively, p = 0.26), but agreement between methods was very low (r = 0.25, p = 0.12). DISCUSSION: Although it was tested during high-intensity exercise and short sampling intervals, the MOXUS performed within the acceptable range of accuracy reported for automated analyzers. Most of the differences between equipments were due to differences in [Formula: see text]. Detecting small changes in [Formula: see text] during an incremental test with small changes in workload, however, might be beyond the equipment's accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24477571What 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.