ArticlePloS one2023
Validity and sensitivity of field tests' heart-rate recovery assessment in recreational football players.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed at examining the criterion validity and sensitivity of heart-rate recovery (HRRec) in profiling cardiorespiratory fitness in male recreational football players in the untrained and trained status, using endurance field-tests. Thirty-two male untrained subjects (age 40 ± 6 years, VO2max 41.7 ± 5.7 ml·kg-1·min-1, body mass 82.7 ± 9.8 kg, stature 173.3 ± 7.4 cm) participated in a 12-week (2‒3 sessions per week) recreational football intervention and were tested pre- and post-intervention (i.e. untrained and trained status). The participants performed three intermittent field tests for aerobic performance assessment, namely Yo-Yo intermittent endurance level 1 (YYIE1) and level 2 (YYIE2) tests, and Yo-Yo intermittent recovery level 1 (YYIR1) test. VO2max was assessed by performing a progressive maximal treadmill test (TT) and maximal HR (HRmax) determined as the maximal value across the testing conditions (i.e., Yo-Yo intermittent tests or TT). HRRec was calculated as the difference between Yo-Yo tests' HRpeak or HRmax and HR at 30 s (HR30), 60 s (HR60) and 120 s (HR120) and considered as beats·min-1 (absolute) and as % of tests' HRpeak or HRmax values. Significant post-intervention improvements (p<0.0001) were shown in VO2max (8.6%) and Yo-Yo tests performance (23-35%). Trivial to small (p>0.05) associations were found between VO2max and HRRec (r = -0.05-0.27, p>0.05) across the Yo-Yo tests, and training status either expressed as percentage of HRpeak or HRmax. The results of this study do not support the use of field-test derived HRRec to track cardiorespiratory fitness and training status in adult male recreational football players.
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.