SynthesisPloS one2024
Assessing anaerobic speed reserve: A systematic review on the validity and reliability of methods to determine maximal aerobic speed and maximal sprinting speed in running-based sports.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maximal aerobic speed: methodological implications and unintended consequences.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Review
- Maximal lactate accumulation rate (European journal of applied physiology · 2026Review
- Physical performance profiling in Moroccan women's football: a functional assessment from the Rabat-Salé-Kénitra regional league.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Physiological Benchmarks and Player Profiling in Elite Football: A Role-Specific Analysis Using T-Scores.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Estimating Maximal Aerobic Speed in Academy Soccer Players: A Comparison Between Time Trial Methods and the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test.European journal of sport science · 2025Article
- Effects of 34 Weeks of Military Service on Body Composition and Physical Fitness in Military Cadets of Angola.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLocomotor profiling using anaerobic speed reserve (ASR) enables insights into athletes' physiological and neuromuscular contributing factors and prescription of high-intensity training beyond maximal aerobic speed (MAS). This systematic review aimed to determine the validity and reliability of different methods to assess the characteristics of ASR, i.e., MAS and maximal sprinting speed (MSS).
methodsA comprehensive search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they reported data on validity and/or reliability for methods to assess MAS or MSS.
results58 studies were included with 28 studies referring to MAS and 30 studies to MSS. Regarding MAS, different methods for cardiopulmonary exercise testing yielded different values (four out of seven studies) of MAS (Cohen's d (ES) = 0.83-2.8; Pearson's r/intraclass correlation coefficient (r/ICC) = 0.46-0.85). Criterion validity of different field tests showed heterogeneous results (ES = 0-3.57; r/ICC = 0.40-0.96). Intraday and interday reliability was mostly acceptable for the investigated methods (ICC/r>0.76; CV<16.9%). Regarding MSS, radar and laser measurements (one out of one studies), timing gates (two out of two studies), and video analysis showed mostly good criterion validity (two out of two studies) (ES = 0.02-0.53; r/ICC = 0.93-0.98) and reliability (r/ICC>0.83; CV<2.43%). Criterion validity (ES = 0.02-7.11) and reliability (r/ICC = 0.14-0.97; CV = 0.7-9.77%) for global or local positioning systems (seven out of nine studies) and treadmill sprinting (one out of one studies) was not acceptable in most studies.
conclusionThe criterion validity of incremental field tests or shuttle runs to examine MAS cannot be confirmed. Results on time trials indicate that distances adapted to the participants' sporting background, fitness, or sex might be suitable to estimate MAS. Regarding MSS, only sprints with radar or laser measures, timing gates, or video analysis provide valid and reliable results for linear sprints of 20 to 70 m.
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.