SynthesisSports medicine - open2026
Validity and Reliability of Portable Blood Lactate Analyzers: A Systematic Review with COSMIN and GRADE Assessment.
Synthesis in Sports medicine - open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- 'Guard' Workout: Can a Lifeguard-Specific High-Intensity Functional Training Reflect Rescue Demands?Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPortable blood lactate analyzers (PBAs) are increasingly used in sports and clinical contexts to assess physiological responses. Blood lactate is a critical biomarker for evaluating performance and metabolic thresholds. However, variability in device accuracy, sampling procedures, and calibration raises concerns about their validity and reliability.
objectivesTo systematically review peer-reviewed studies assessing the validity and reliability of commercially available PBAs compared to laboratory reference methods and to evaluate the methodological quality and certainty of evidence using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) frameworks.
methodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus. Of 253 records identified, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. Validity was assessed using statistical measures such as Pearson's correlation coefficient (r), concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA), and mean absolute error (MAE). Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), and standard error of measurement (SEM). COSMIN and GRADE were used to rate study quality and evidence certainty.
resultsPBAs (e.g., Lactate Pro, Lactate Scout, Accutrend, Lactate Plus) showed strong correlations with reference standards (r = 0.95-0.99) and high reliability (ICC > 0.90; CV < 5%). However, systematic biases at higher lactate concentrations were common. Thirteen studies had high methodological quality.
conclusionsPBAs demonstrate strong reliability and moderate-to-high validity. Standardized protocols and improved calibration are needed to ensure consistency with laboratory-grade analyzers.
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.