ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2025
The 9/3 Min Running Test: A Simple and Practical Approach to Estimate the Critical and Maximal Aerobic Power.
Article in European journal of sport science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Measurement and Application of Critical Speed and D' in Running: A Scoping Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to determine the validity of the linear critical power (CP) and Peronnet models to estimate the power output associated with the second ventilatory threshold (VT2) and the maximal aerobic power (MAP) using two-time trials. Nineteen recreational runners (10 males and 9 females and maximum oxygen uptake: 53.0 ± 4.7 mL/kg/min) performed a graded exercise test (GXT) to determine the VT2 and MAP. On a second test, athletes performed two-time trials of 9 and 3 min interspaced by 30 min. The CP was determined from the linear CP model and compared with the power output associated with the VT2. The MAP was determined from the linear Peronnet model, established at 7 min, and compared with the MAP determined in the GXT. The CP model was valid for determining the VT2, regardless of sex (p = 0.130; 9/3 vs. GXT: 3.5 [-1.1 to 8.2] W). The MAP was overestimated (p = 0.015) specifically in males (9/3 vs. GXT: 9.2 [3.3 to 15.1] W) rather than in females (p = 9/3 vs. GXT: 1.7 [-4.4 to 8.0] W). Therefore, MAP estimates were determined introducing the CP and W' parameters to a stepwise multiple linear regression analysis. For females, the CP was the unique significant predictor of MAP (p < 0.001) explaining 96.7% of the variance. In males, both CP and W' were significant predictors of MAP (p < 0.001) explaining 97.7% of the variance. Practitioners can validly estimate the VT2 and MAP through a practical testing protocol in both male and female recreational runners.
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.