Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35009945›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Anthony Bouillod, Georges Soto-Romero, Frederic Grappe, William Bertucci, Emmanuel Brunet, Johan Cassirame

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Validity of the Quarq Cycling Power Meter.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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.

Anthony BouillodEA4660, C3S Health-Sport Department, Sports University, 25000 Besancon, France.
Georges Soto-RomeroLAAS-CNRS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, 31000 Toulouse, France.
Frederic GrappeEA4660, C3S Health-Sport Department, Sports University, 25000 Besancon, France.
William BertucciEA7507, Laboratoire Performance, Santé, Métrologie, Société, 51100 Reims, France.
Emmanuel BrunetFrench Cycling Federation, 78180 Saint Quentin, France.
Johan CassirameEA4660, C3S Health-Sport Department, Sports University, 25000 Besancon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6116-5795

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A large number of power meters have become commercially available during the last decades to provide power output (PO) measurement. Some of these power meters were evaluated for validity in the literature. This study aimed to perform a review of the available literature on the validity of cycling power meters. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar have been explored with PRISMA methodology. A total of 74 studies have been extracted for the reviewing process. Validity is a general quality of the measurement determined by the assessment of different metrological properties: Accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness. Accuracy was most often studied from the metrological property (74 studies). Reproducibility was the second most studied (40 studies) property. Finally, repeatability, sensitivity, and robustness were considerably less studied with only 7, 5, and 5 studies, respectively. The SRM power meter is the most used as a gold standard in the studies. Moreover, the number of participants was very different among them, from 0 (when using a calibration rig) to 56 participants. The PO tested was up to 1700 W, whereas the pedalling cadence ranged between 40 and 180 rpm, including submaximal and maximal exercises. Other exercise conditions were tested, such as torque, position, temperature, and vibrations. This review provides some caveats and recommendations when testing the validity of a cycling power meter, including all of the metrological properties (accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness) and some exercise conditions (PO range, sprint, pedalling cadence, torque, position, participant, temperature, vibration, and field test).

Indexed as

BicyclingExercise TestExerciseHumansReproducibility of ResultsTorqueexercise conditionsgold standardmechanical powermetrological propertiesstatistical analysis

Identifiers

PMID35009945
PMCPMC8749704

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.