ArticleSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2025
Rating of perceived exertion versus heart rate for isometric exercise prescription: Reliability and agreement study.
Article in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 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.
- Neuromuscular adaptations to load-matched isometric vs. dynamic resistance training in Kho-Kho athletes: a pilot investigation.Frontiers in sports and active living · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have shown that isometric exercise training reduces systolic blood pressure by approximately 8 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure by approximately 4 mmHg in both normotensive and hypertensive individuals. However, the prescription of isometric exercises can be based on the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) or heart rate (HR) obtained during the maximal incremental isometry test. The reliability and agreement of this test have not been assessed.
objectivesTo analyze the reliability and agreement indicators of HR and RPE during isometric wall squat incremental tests. DESIGN AND
settingA reliability and agreement study was conducted at Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.
methodsTwenty-eight healthy subjects (54% men, 26 ± 5 years) performed two isometric wall squat incremental tests. The test began with a knee joint angle of 135° (knee and leg) progressively reduced by 10° at each stage. Each stage lasts 2 minutes or until voluntary exhaustion. The HR and RPE were obtained during the tests. Reliability and agreement were established using test-retest (paired t-test or Wilcoxon test), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), coefficient of variation (CV), and Bland-Altman plots.
resultsThe HR and RPE increased significantly during both tests. The HR and RPE at each stage were similar between the two test sessions (P > 0.05). Both HRmax (ICC: 0.695, P = 0.002, SEM = 8.1 bpm and CV = 5.8%) and RPEmax (ICC: 0.525, P = 0.036, SEM = 0.4 and CV = 3.6%) presented similar reliability indicators, and no statistically significant differences were obtained between the two test sessions (P > 0.05). The Bland-Altman plots indicated good agreement between HRmax and RPEmax.
conclusionHR and RPE showed similar reliability and agreement during the isometric wall squat incremental test.
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.