ArticlePerceptual and motor skills2014
Prediction of VO2 peak using OMNI Ratings of Perceived Exertion from a submaximal cycle exercise test.
Article in Perceptual and motor skills, 2014. 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.
- Effect of Cloth Masks and N95 Respirators on Maximal Exercise Performance in Collegiate Athletes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Cross-validation of Peak Oxygen Consumption Prediction Models From OMNI Perceived Exertion.International journal of sports medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to develop statistical models to predict peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak) using OMNI Ratings of Perceived Exertion measured during submaximal cycle ergometry. Male (M = 20.9 yr., SE = 0.4) and female (M = 21.6 yr., SE = 0.5) participants (N = 81) completed a load-incremented maximal cycle ergometer exercise test. Simultaneous multiple linear regression was used to develop separate VO2 peak statistical models using submaximal ratings of perceived exertion for the overall body, legs, and chest/breathing as predictor variables. VO2 peak (L·min(-1)) predicted for men and women from ratings of perceived exertion for the overall body (3.02 ± 0.06; 2.03 ± 0.04), legs (3.02 ± 0.06; 2.04 ± 0.04), and chest/breathing (3.02 ± 0.05; 2.03 ± 0.03) were similar to measured VO2 peak (3.02 ± 0.10; 2.03 ± 0.06, ps > .05). Statistical models based on submaximal OMNI Ratings of Perceived Exertion provide an easily administered and accurate method to predict VO2 peak.
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.