Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36929015›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2023

Physiological and biomechanical responses to exercise on two different types of rowing ergometers in NCAA Division I oarswomen.

Tianyi Lu, Margaret T Jones, Jae Yom, Ai Ishida, Jason B White

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Tianyi LuKinesiology, George Mason University, Manassas, VA, USA.
Margaret T JonesKinesiology, George Mason University, Manassas, VA, USA.
Jae YomExercise Science, University of Illinois-Springfield, Springfield, IL, USA.
Ai IshidaMajor League Soccer, Houston Dynamo FC, Houston, TX, USA.
Jason B WhiteExercise Science, Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, KY, USA. whitej47@nku.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7641-9009

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStationary (SE) and dynamic (DE) rowing ergometers, that are utilized for indoor training and physical assessment of competitive rowers, may elicit different physiological and biomechanical responses. The present study used SE and DE ergometers to examine submaximal and peak physiological and biomechanical responses during an incremental rowing test.

methodsTwelve National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I oarswomen performed seven-stage rowing tests with the last stage performed with maximal effort. Heart rate (HR), lactate (LA), oxygen uptake (VO

resultsSR was higher at maximal stage DE (29.3 vs. 34.8 strokes/min, p = 0.018, d = 1.213). No difference occurred in responses of maximal stage HR, RPE, VO2, VE, LA, or GE between the two ergometers. Submaximal LA and SR were greater on the DE for all submaximal stages. Submaximal VE was greater on the DE for all submaximal stages except Stage 3 (p = 0.160, d = 0.655). VO

conclusionRowing on the DE appears to elicit a greater stroke rate and more optimal joint angles especially at high intensities. Hence, the DE is worthy of consideration as a preferred ergometer for women rowers.

Indexed as

SportsWater SportsAthletesErgometryExerciseExercise TestFemaleHeart RateHumansOxygen ConsumptionCollegiate oarswomenExercise physiologyJoint range of motionRowing ergometerRowing injuriesStroke rate

Identifiers

PMID36929015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.