ArticleSports medicine - open2026
Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Track Sprint Cycling Performance in Elite-Level Male Cyclists: A Multinational Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Article in Sports medicine - open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional linear approaches may not adequately capture the non-linear relationships and interactions among laboratory-derived sprint test metrics. This study aimed to predict flying sprint performance of elite-level male track cyclists using multiple linear regression and random forest models based on anaerobic ergometer metrics.
methodsA total of 333 elite male track cyclists completed a 30-s all-out cycle-ergometer sprint test and indoor-velodrome flying 100-m and 200-m sprints. Eight predictors derived from the ergometer test result (body mass, peak power output, 30-s mean power, mean cadence, relative peak power, 5-s maximal mean power normalized to body mass, maximal 5-s power decline, and percentage power drop) were used to develop multiple linear regression and tuned random forest models. Model performance was evaluated on a held-out test set, with random forest hyperparameters optimized via nested cross-validation on the training data. The 100-200-m split time (flying 200-m minus flying 100-m time) was examined in unadjusted and peak power-adjusted models to assess the independent association of power decline metrics with second-half sprint performance.
resultsIn mutually adjusted multiple linear regression models, 30-s average power was the only independent predictor of flying 100-m and 200-m times (p < 0.001). Test-set predictive performance was modest for linear regression (R
conclusionsSprint performance could be predicted with modest accuracy from routinely collected ergometer metrics, with sustained power and relative peak power emerging as the primary contributors. Power decline metrics showed no independent association with second-half sprint performance after accounting for peak power, suggesting that fatigue resistance, as measured by a 30-s all-out cycle-ergometer sprint test, may not directly translate to competitive second-half sprint outcomes.
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.