Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39953333›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of applied physiology2025

What is a cycling race simulation anyway: a review on protocols to assess durability in cycling.

W M Peeters, M Barrett, T Podlogar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of applied physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

W M PeetersSchool of Biomedical, Nutritional and Sport Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK. Wouter.peeters@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6328-9751
M BarrettSchool of Biomedical, Nutritional and Sport Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK.
T PodlogarDepartment of Public Health and Sport Sciences, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0142-4457

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physiological resilience or durability is now recognised as a determinant of endurance performance such as road cycling. Reliable, ecologically valid and standardised performance tests in laboratory-based cycling protocols have to be established to investigate mechanisms underpinning, and interventions improving durability. This review aims to provide an overview of available race simulation protocols in the literature and examines its rigour around themes that influence durability including (i) exercise intensity anchoring and (ii) carbohydrate intake whilst also (iii) inspecting reliability and justification of the developed protocols. Using a systematic search approach, 48 articles were identified that met our criteria as a cycling race simulation. Most protocols presented limitations to be recommended as exercise test to investigate durability, such as not appropriately addressing the influence of exercise intensity domains by anchoring exercise intensity as % peak power or %

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceBicyclingExercise TestPhysical EnduranceHumansOxygen ConsumptionCarbohydratesCyclingDurabilityPerformancePre-loadReliability

Identifiers

PMID39953333
PMCPMC12174182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.