ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2021
Discomfort, pain and fatigue levels of 160 cyclists after a kinematic bike-fitting method: an experimental study.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Examining the Effectiveness of Bike Fitting.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Spinal Alignment and Pain: An Assessment of Amateur Road Cyclists-A Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Idmatch Bike Fitting Enhances Power Output in Recreational Cyclists: A Pilot Study.International journal of exercise science · 2025Article
- Long-Term Effects of a Kinematic Bikefitting Method on Pain, Comfort, and Fatigue: A Prospective Cohort Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Comparative Analysis of Male Cyclist Population in Four Asia Countries for Anthropometric Measurements.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Strength Level of Professional Elite Soccer Players after the COVID-19 Lockdown Period: A Retrospective Double-Arm Cohort Study.Journal of sports medicine (Hindawi Publishing Corporation) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse rider's subjective responses after a standardised bicycle ergonomic adjustment method.
methodsExperimental study of 160 healthy, amateur mountain bikers analysed previously and 30 days after a bike-fitting session. The main outcome measures were subjective comfort level (Feeling Scale, FEEL), fatigue (OMINI Scale) and pain (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS).
resultsAll variables demonstrated statistical significance between groups pre and post bike-fit session (p<0001). FEEL, OMNI and VAS-knee demonstrated large effect sizes (d=1.30; d=1.39 and d=0.86, respectively). VAS-hands, VAS-neck and VAS-back indicated moderate effect size (d=0.58; d=0.52 and d=0.43, respectively). VAS-groin and VAS-ankle indicated a small size effect (d=0.46 and d=0.43, respectively).
conclusionsOverall discomfort, fatigue and pain in healthy mountain biker adults improved according to all three scales. The major improvements in pain levels were detected on the knee, hands, back and neck compared with presession values. Groin and ankle pain had smaller improvements but were still significant. Future clinical trials should address the bias effects of this experimental study.
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.