Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42282454›Full record

ArticleSports medicine and health science2026

McArdle disease (Glycogen Storage Disease Type V) from an exercise physiology and biochemistry perspective: Important considerations for exercise and physical activity testing and data interpretation.

Sam L Torrens, Evelyn Parr, Robert Robergs, Marek Nalos, Liza Phillips, Peter Finnigan, Nicol Voermans

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Sports medicine and health science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Sam L TorrensFaculty of Health, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně, Pasteurova 3544/1, 400 96, Ústí nad Labem-město, Czech Republic.
Evelyn ParrMary Mackillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Level 5, 215 Spring Street Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, Australia.
Robert RobergsFaculty of Health, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně, Pasteurova 3544/1, 400 96, Ústí nad Labem-město, Czech Republic.
Marek NalosDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Plzen Hospital and Charles University, Alej Svobody 1655/76, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Liza PhillipsQueensland Diabetes and Endocrinology Centre, Mater Hospital, 41 Annerley Road, South Brisbane, Queensland, 4101, Australia.
Peter FinniganQueen Square Centre for Neuromuscular Diseases, Queen Square, London, WC1N 3BG, UK.
Nicol VoermansRadboud University Medical Centre, Neurology 664, P.O. Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Traditionally, the management and research of inborn errors of metabolism have been primarily overseen by genetic specialists, whose expertise has guided both therapeutic strategies and efforts to identify potential cures. In more recent times, exercise scientists and exercise physiologists have been shown to provide important insights into these conditions from new perspectives. Because exercise and physical activity testing is often used to determine the main outcome variables for interventions designed to improve the lives of those with inborn errors of metabolism, it is logical that exercise specialists are involved in research design and data interpretation. Purpose: This article aims to provide important exercise and physical activity testing guidance and advice for researchers of McArdle disease (MD) with evidence-based rationale to help improve data interpretation and the validity of research outcomes for future research. The article presents clear definitions and examples of concepts commonly used in exercise and physical activity research (i.e., absolute and relative intensity) and outlines methodological considerations that may compromise results interpretation (i.e., the use of broad exercise intensity ranges, pretesting liver glycogen standardisation). Additionally, the article discusses important considerations and limitations in using exercise testing metrics in MD populations, and their associated interpretations, that have been previously validated in non-MD populations (i.e., maximal rate of oxygen consumption [ Conclusion: Inevitably, prior research forms the foundations to future advances which places an important responsibility on all scientists to design robust research methodologies, produce valid and reliable results, identify limitations to their outcomes, and to interpret and apply these results correctly

Indexed as

Clinical practiceMetabolismRare diseaseResearch designSkeletal muscle

Identifiers

PMID42282454
PMCPMC13250202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.