ArticlePloS one2017
Anaerobic metabolism during short all-out efforts in tethered running: Comparison of energy expenditure and mechanical parameters between different sprint durations for testing.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Anaerobic and Aerobic Energy System Contribution During Maximal Exercise: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Pooled it
- Are Self-Selected Intervals as Effective as Fixed Intervals in Controlling Acute Responses in High-Intensity Interval Resistance Training?International journal of exercise science · 2023Article
- Genetics and sports performance: the present and future in the identification of talent for sports based on DNA testing.European journal of applied physiology · 2022Review
- Comparison of physiological responses of running on a nonmotorized and conventional motor-propelled treadmill at similar intensities.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Effects of different inspiratory muscle warm-up loads on mechanical, physiological and muscle oxygenation responses during high-intensity running and recovery.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of parameters derived from a three-minute all-out test with classical benchmarks for running exercise.PloS one · 2022Article
- Effect of skill-based training vs. small-sided games on physical performance improvement in young soccer players.Biology of sport · 2020Article
- Corresponding Assessment Scenarios in Laboratory and on-Court Tests: Centrality Measurements by Complex Networks Analysis in Young Basketball Players.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- New Insights into Mechanical, Metabolic and Muscle Oxygenation Signals During and After High-Intensity Tethered Running.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Novel paddle stroke analysis for elite slalom kayakers: Relationship with force parameters.PloS one · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study's aims to verify the energy expenditure, metabolic distress and usefulness to evaluate the anaerobic constructs for different all-out durations in running efforts. Twelve active male underwent four testing sessions, one for familiarization and three performing one all-out (AO) tethered running sprint lasting 30s, 20s or 10s. Oxygen consumption, excess post exercise oxygen consumption, and lactate production were retained to analyse metabolic function, together with mechanical power and work as performance parameters. Paired results were compared via one-way ANOVA for repeated measures (Tukey-HSD post-hoc), effect sizes and ICC for absolute agreement. Statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. Despite total and energy expenditure from oxidative pathway being significantly higher for longer durations (p < 0.001; ES > 0.7), glycolytic energy expenditure presented an agreement between AO30s and AO20s (ICC-A = 0.63*), while the paired comparisons to AO10s have presented significant differences (p < 0.01; ES > 1.0). Phosphagen energy expenditure were similar between all-out durations (p = 0.12; ICC-A = 0.62*; ES < 0.5). Maximum mechanical power was higher in AO10s than in AO30s (p = 0.03; ES = 0.6), not being different between AO10s and AO20s (p = 0.67; ICC-A = 0.88*; ES = 0.2) and between AO20s and AO30s (p = 0.18; ICC-A = 0.56*; ES = 0.4). In addition, agreement between work in the first ten seconds was confirmed via ICC only between AO10s and AO20s (p = 0.50; ICC-A = 0.86*; ES = 0.3), but not for the other paired comparisons (p < 0.1; ICC < 0.45; ES > 0.5). AO20s is a better alternative to estimate anaerobic power and capacity in one single test, with similar oxidative demand than AO30s.
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.