ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2016
Comparison of the influence of age on cycling efficiency and the energy cost of running in well-trained triathletes.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of Training on Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Triathletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Six-year follow-up of a world record-breaking master marathon runner.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2024Article
- Effects of a similar amount of regular non-structured or competitive physical activity across late adulthood: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Article
- Master Athletes Are Extending the Limits of Human Endurance.Frontiers in physiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLocomotive efficiency is cited as an important component to endurance performance; however, inconsistent observations of age-related changes in efficiency question its influence in the performance of masters athletes. PURPOSE: This study examined locomotive efficiency in young and masters triathletes during both a run and cycle test.
methodsTwenty young (28.5 ± 2.6 years) and 20 masters (59.8 ± 1.3 years) triathletes completed an incremental cycling and running test to determine maximal aerobic consumption (VO2max) and the first ventilatory threshold (VT1). Participants then completed 10-min submaximal running and cycling tests at VT1 during which locomotive efficiency was calculated from expired ventilation. Additionally, body fat percentage was determined using skin-fold assessment.
resultsDuring the cycle and run, VO2max was lower in the masters (48.3 ± 5.4 and 49.6 ± 4.8 ml kg(-1) min(-1), respectively) compared with young (61.6 ± 5.7 and 62.4 ± 5.2 ml kg(-1) min(-1), respectively) cohort. Maximal running speed and the cycling power output corresponding to VO2max were also lower in the masters (15.1 ± 0.8 km h(-1) and 318.6 ± 26.0 W) compared with the young (19.5 ± 1.3 km h(-1) and 383.6 ± 35.0 W) cohort. Cycling efficiency was lower (-11.2%) in the masters compared with young cohort. Similar results were observed for the energy cost of running (+10.8%); however, when scaled to lean body mass, changes were more pronounced during the run (+22.1%).
conclusionsWithin trained triathletes, ageing can influence efficiency in both the run and cycle discipline. While disregarded in the past, efficiency should be considered in research examining performance in ageing athletes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26392273What 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.