Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33083103›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2020

Physiological aspects and energetic contribution in 20s:10s high-intensity interval exercise at different intensities.

Gabriel V Protzen, Charles Bartel, Victor S Coswig, Paulo Gentil, Fabricio B Del Vecchio

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2020. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Gabriel V ProtzenPhysical Education College, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Charles BartelPhysical Education College, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Victor S CoswigFaculty of Physical Education, Federal University of Para, Castanhal, Pará, Brazil.
Paulo GentilFaculty of Physical Education and Dance, Federal University of Goias, Goiânia, Goiás.
Fabricio B Del VecchioPhysical Education College, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Pelotas · BRInstituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Pará · BRUniversidade Federal de Goiás · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the most popular high-intensity interval exercises is the called "Tabata Protocol". However, most investigations have limitations in describing the work intensity, and this fact appears to be due to the protocol unfeasibility. Furthermore, the physiological demands and energetic contribution during this kind of exercise remain unclear.

methodsEight physically active students (21.8 ± 3.7 years) and eight well-trained cycling athletes (27.8 ± 6.4 years) were enrolled. In the first visit, we collected descriptive data and the peak power output (PPO). On the next three visits, in random order, participants performed interval training with the same time structure (effort:rest 20s:10s) but using different intensities (115%, 130%, and 170% of PPO). We collected the number of sprints, power output, oxygen consumption, blood lactate, and heart rate.

resultsThe analysis of variance for multivariate test (number of sprints, power output, blood lactate, peak heart rate and percentage of maximal heart rate) showed significant differences between groups (

Indexed as

Anaerobic capacityEnergy system contributionHigh-intensity interval exerciseHigh-intensity interval trainingPhysiological aspectsTabata protocol

Identifiers

PMID33083103
PMCPMC7560324
OpenAlexW3092252280

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.