Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29435760›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2018

Prescribing 6-weeks of running training using parameters from a self-paced maximal oxygen uptake protocol.

James S Hogg, James G Hopker, Sarah L Coakley, Alexis R Mauger

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

James S HoggEndurance Research Group, Faculty of Science, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Chantam, ME4 4AG, Kent, UK. J.Hogg-580@kent.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1695-1006
James G HopkerEndurance Research Group, Faculty of Science, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Chantam, ME4 4AG, Kent, UK.
Sarah L CoakleyDepartment of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Chichester, Chichester, UK.
Alexis R MaugerEndurance Research Group, Faculty of Science, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Kent, Chatham Maritime, Chantam, ME4 4AG, Kent, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe self-paced maximal oxygen uptake test (SPV) may offer effective training prescription metrics for athletes. This study aimed to examine whether SPV-derived data could be used for training prescription.

methodsTwenty-four recreationally active male and female runners were randomly assigned between two training groups: (1) Standardised (STND) and (2) Self-Paced (S-P). Participants completed 4 running sessions a week using a global positioning system-enabled (GPS) watch: 2 × interval sessions; 1 × recovery run; and 1 × tempo run. STND had training prescribed via graded exercise test (GXT) data, whereas S-P had training prescribed via SPV data. In STND, intervals were prescribed as 6 × 60% of the time that velocity at [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text]) could be maintained (T

resultsSTND and S-P training significantly improved [Formula: see text] by 4 ± 8 and 6 ± 6%, CS by 7 ± 7 and 3 ± 3%; LT by 5 ± 4% and 7 ± 8%, respectively (all P < .05), with no differences observed between groups.

conclusionsNovel metrics obtained from the SPV can offer similar training prescription and improvement in [Formula: see text], CS and LT compared to training derived from a traditional GXT.

Indexed as

Oxygen ConsumptionAdultFemaleHumansMalePhysical Conditioning, HumanRunningCritical speedEndurance trainingLactate thresholdRecreational runnersRunning performance

Identifiers

PMID29435760
PMCPMC5959994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.