Trial reportPloS one2016
Effects of Sprint versus High-Intensity Aerobic Interval Training on Cross-Country Mountain Biking Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01944865 (Effect of Intermittent Versus Interval Training on Mountain Bike Cross-country Performance), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Effect of Intermittent Versus Interval Training on Mountain Bike Cross-country Performance: a Parallel-group Randomized Trial
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Physiology of Contemporary Olympic Cross-Country Mountain Biking: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine - open · 2026Pooled it
- Programming Interval Training to Optimize Time-Trial Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Pooled it
- Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training Versus Sprint Interval Training on Time-Trial Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Pooled it
- Reliability of Time to Exhaustion Above the Power Output at VOInternational journal of exercise science · 2023Article
- Current Perspectives of Cross-Country Mountain Biking: Physiological and Mechanical Aspects, Evolution of Bikes, Accidents and Injuries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Effect of Two Different Training Interventions on Cycling Performance in Mountain Bike Cross-Country Olympic Athletes.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Acute Effects of Work Rest Interval Duration of 3 HIIT Protocols on Cycling Power in Trained Young Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Toward Predicting Human Performance Outcomes From Wearable Technologies: A Computational Modeling Approach.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Exercise Intensity and Pacing Pattern During a Cross-Country Olympic Mountain Bike Race.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe current study compared the effects of high-intensity aerobic training (HIT) and sprint interval training (SIT) on mountain biking (MTB) race simulation performance and physiological variables, including peak power output (PPO), lactate threshold (LT) and onset of blood lactate accumulation (OBLA).
methodsSixteen mountain bikers (mean ± SD: age 32.1 ± 6.4 yr, body mass 69.2 ± 5.3 kg and VO2max 63.4 ± 4.5 mL∙kg(-1)∙min(-1)) completed graded exercise and MTB performance tests before and after six weeks of training. The HIT (7-10 x [4-6 min--highest sustainable intensity / 4-6 min-CR100 10-15]) and SIT (8-12 x [30 s--all-out intensity / 4 min--CR100 10-15]) protocols were included in the participants' regular training programs three times per week.
resultsPost-training analysis showed no significant differences between training modalities (HIT vs. SIT) in body mass, PPO, LT or OBLA (p = 0.30 to 0.94). The Cohen's d effect size (ES) showed trivial to small effects on group factor (p = 0.00 to 0.56). The interaction between MTB race time and training modality was almost significant (p = 0.08), with a smaller ES in HIT vs. SIT training (ES = -0.43). A time main effect (pre- vs. post-phases) was observed in MTB race performance and in several physiological variables (p = 0.001 to 0.046). Co-variance analysis revealed that the HIT (p = 0.043) group had significantly better MTB race performance measures than the SIT group. Furthermore, magnitude-based inferences showed HIT to be of likely greater benefit (83.5%) with a lower probability of harmful effects (0.8%) compared to SIT.
conclusionThe results of the current study suggest that six weeks of either HIT or SIT may be effective at increasing MTB race performance; however, HIT may be a preferable strategy.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01944865.
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.