Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34104828›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational research2021

Validity and reliability of RPE as a measure of intensity during isometric wall squat exercise.

John W D Lea, Jamie M O'Driscoll, Damian A Coleman, Jonathan D Wiles

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Session-RPE for quantifying workload in olympic curling athletes.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

John W D LeaSchool of Human and Life Sciences, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Jamie M O'DriscollSchool of Human and Life Sciences, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Damian A ColemanSchool of Human and Life Sciences, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Jonathan D WilesSchool of Human and Life Sciences, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Canterbury Christ Church University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsIsometric exercise (IE), including wall squat training, has been shown to be effective at reducing resting blood pressure (BP). Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) is also widely used as an accessible additional measure of IE intensity. Despite this, no RPE scales have been specifically designed for use with IE and it is not clear whether RPE is sensitive enough to distinguish between different lower limb IE workloads. Therefore, the aims of this study were to assess the validity and reliability of RPE as a measure of IE intensity (workload) and physiological exertion (Heart rate and BP), and to examine whether RPE is able to discern differences in wall squat workload (knee angle) at a resolution of 10-degrees, as was previous shown for heart rate (HR) and BP.

methodsTwenty-nine male participants completed eight separate isometric wall squat testing sessions, separated by a minimum of 5-h. Each session consisted of a single 2-min isometric wall squat test, at one of five randomized workloads (knee joint angles). Three of the knee angles were repeated, a second time, to allow measurements of reliability. Throughout the exercise protocol, HR and BP were recorded continuously; values for each 30-s time-point were calculated as the mean of the proceeding 5-s, and peak values for the 2-min bout were taken as the mean results for the final 5-s of the bout. In addition, mean results for the full 2-min period were calculated. RPE was collected every 30 s. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating RPE results with the criterion measures: Knee joint angle, HR, and BP. Differences in RPE were assessed across consecutive workloads and time-points.

resultsThere were significant increases in RPE at each consecutive wall squat workload (P<0.001) and between each consecutive 30-s time point (P<0.001). In addition, the RPE results produced a significant inverse relationship with knee angle (r=-0.79; P<0.001) and significant positive relationships with HR (r=0.53, P<0.001) and BP (systolic: r=0.77; diastolic: r=0.62; and mean arterial pressure: r=0.70, P<0.001).

conclusionRPE provides a valid and reliable measure of isometric wall squat intensity, physiological exertion and can discern between knee angles with a resolution of 10°. RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS: Patients and practitioners implementing isometric exercise training for arterial blood pressure reduction can use RPE to accurately monitor the intensity of the exercise and the physiological responses.

Indexed as

EffortExternal loadPerceived exertionResistance exerciseWorkload

Identifiers

PMID34104828
PMCPMC8177844
OpenAlexW3172670595

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.