Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30596748›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Validity, reliability and minimum detectable change of COSMED K5 portable gas exchange system in breath-by-breath mode.

Laura Guidetti, Marco Meucci, Francesco Bolletta, Gian Pietro Emerenziani, Maria Chiara Gallotta, Carlo Baldari

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing 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

58 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Locomotion-specific metabolic demands in 30-s anaerobic efforts.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. In-Field Validity and Inter-Unit Variability of Metabolic Carts During Simulated Exercise.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Pilot evaluation of a dance-based physical activity program for adults with Down syndrome.Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine · 2026
    Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Laura GuidettiDepartment of Movement, Human and Health Sciences, University of Rome "Foro Italico", Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1419-4550
Marco MeucciVascular Biology and Autonomic Studies Laboratory, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina, United States of America.
Francesco BollettaDepartment of Movement, Human and Health Sciences, University of Rome "Foro Italico", Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3130-1458
Gian Pietro EmerenzianiDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Magna Græcia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Maria Chiara GallottaDepartment of Movement, Human and Health Sciences, University of Rome "Foro Italico", Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5532-6380
Carlo BaldariDepartment of Movement, Human and Health Sciences, University of Rome "Foro Italico", Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6227-3571

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to examine the validity, reliability and minimum detectable change (MDC) of the Cosmed K5 in breath by breath (BxB) mode, against VacuMed metabolic simulator. Intra and inter-units reliability was also assessed.

methodsFourteen metabolic rates (from 0.9 to 4 L.min-1) were reproduced by a VacuMed system and pulmonary ventilation (VE), oxygen consumption (VO2) and carbon dioxide production (VCO2) were measured by two different K5 units. Validity was assessed by ordinary least products (OLP) regression analysis, Bland-Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), mean percentage differences, technical errors (TE) and MDC for VE, VO2, and VCO2. Intra- and inter-K5 reliability was evaluated by absolute percentage differences between measurements (MAPE), ICCs, TE, and MDC.

resultsValidity analysis from OLP regression data and Bland- Altman plots indicated high agreement between K5 and simulator. ICC values were excellent for all variables (>0.99). Mean percentage differences in VE (-0.50%, p = 0.11), VO2 (-0.04%, p = 0.80), and VCO2 (-1.03%, p = 0.09) showed no significant bias. The technical error (TE) ranged from 0.73% to 1.34% (VE and VCO2 respectively). MDC were lower than 4% (VE = 2.0%, VO2 = 3.8%, VCO2 = 3.7%). The intra and inter K5 reliability assessment reveled excellent ICCs (>0.99), MAPE <2% (no significant differences between trials), TE < or around 1%, MDC <or around 3%.

conclusionsK5 in BxB mode is a valid and reliable system for metabolic measurements. This is the first study assessing the MDC accounting only for technical variability reporting intra- and inter-units MDCs <3.3%.

Indexed as

Oxygen ConsumptionPulmonary Gas ExchangeBreath TestsCarbon DioxideHumansOxygenCarbon DioxideOxygen

Identifiers

PMID30596748
PMCPMC6312326

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.