Uncertainty in determining the optimal test duration for maximal rate of lactate accumulation during all-out sprint cycle ergometry.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Maximal lactate accumulation rate (European journal of applied physiology · 2026
   Review
2. Modeling lactate threshold in cycling-influence of sex, maximal oxygen uptake, and cost of cycling in young athletes.European journal of applied physiology · 2025
   Article
3. Supplementation of Creatine Monohydrate Improves Sprint Performance but Has no Effect on Glycolytic Contribution: A Nonrandomized, Placebo-Controlled Crossover Trial in Trained Cyclists.Current developments in nutrition · 2025
   Article

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

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as