ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2024
Prediction of instantaneous perceived effort during outdoor running using accelerometry and machine learning.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Rating of perceived exertion in continuous sports: a scoping review with evidence gap map.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Pooled it
- Machine Learning-Driven Muscle Fatigue Estimation in Resistance Training with Assistive Robotics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Endurance Sports: Metabolic, Recovery, and Nutritional Perspectives.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Early marathon running metrics from inertial measurement units predict significant pace reduction.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rate of perceived effort (RPE) is a subjective scale widely used for defining training loads. However, the subjective nature of the metric might lead to an inaccurate representation of the imposed metabolic/mechanical exercise demands. Therefore, this study aimed to predict the rate of perceived exertions during running using biomechanical parameters extracted from a commercially available running smartwatch. Forty-three recreational runners performed a simulated 5-km race on a track, providing their RPE from a Borg scale (6-20) every 400 m. Running distance, heart rate, foot contact time, cadence, stride length, and vertical oscillation were extracted from a running smartwatch (Garmin 735XT). Machine learning regression models were trained to predict the RPE at every 5 s of the 5-km race using subject-independent (leave-one-out), as well as a subject-dependent regression method. The subject-dependent method was tested using 5%, 10%, or 20% of the runner's data in the training set while using the remaining data for testing. The average root-mean-square error (RMSE) in predicting the RPE using the subject-independent method was 1.8 ± 0.8 RPE points (range 0.6-4.1; relative RMSE ~ 12 ± 6%) across the entire 5-km race. However, the error from subject-dependent models was reduced to 1.00 ± 0.31, 0.66 ± 0.20 and 0.45 ± 0.13 RPE points when using 5%, 10%, and 20% of data for training, respectively (average relative RMSE < 7%). All types of predictions underestimated the maximal RPE in ~ 1 RPE point. These results suggest that the data accessible from commercial smartwatches can be used to predict perceived exertion, opening new venues to improve training workload monitoring.
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.