ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2024
The role of machine learning methods in physiological explorations of endurance trained athletes: a mini-review.
Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wearable Biosensing and Machine Learning for Data-Driven Training and Coaching Support.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Toward a record-eligible sub-2-hour marathon: an updated integrative framework of Physiological, technological, and cognitive determinants.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Review
- Machine learning models for reinjury risk prediction using cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) data: optimizing athlete recovery.BioData mining · 2025Article
- Quantifying training response in cycling based on cardiovascular drift using machine learning.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Dynamic Prediction of Physical Exertion: Leveraging AI Models and Wearable Sensor Data During Cycling Exercise.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endurance-trained athletes require physiological explorations that have evolved throughout the history of exercise physiology with technological advances. From the use of the Douglas bag to measure gas exchange to the development of wearable connected devices, advances in physiological explorations have enabled us to move from the classic but still widely used cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) to the collection of data under real conditions on outdoor endurance or ultra-endurance events. However, such explorations are often costly, time-consuming, and complex, creating a need for efficient analysis methods. Machine Learning (ML) has emerged as a powerful tool in exercise physiology, offering solutions to these challenges. Given that exercise physiologists may be unfamiliar with ML, this mini-review provides a concise overview of its relevance to the field. It introduces key ML methods, highlights their ability to predict important physiological parameters (e.g., heart rate variability and exercise-induced hypoxemia), and discusses their strengths and limitations. Finally, it outlines future directions based on the challenges identified, serving as an initial reference for physiologists exploring the application of ML in endurance exercise.
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.