ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Endurance tests capture complementary dimensions of physical performance.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Commonly used endurance tests are often treated as interchangeable, although the extent to which they capture shared and distinct dimensions of physical performance remains unclear. This study examined the informational value of commonly used endurance tests and identified a reduced battery that preserved multidimensional performance information. Methods: A total of 157 men (20.9 ± 1.2 years) and 29 women (20.7 ± 1.0 years) completed six endurance tests alongside assessments of strength, power, agility, and body composition. Correlation analysis, principal component analysis, and multiple regression were used to evaluate shared and unique information across tests. Results: Running tests were strongly interrelated, as were rowing tests. A general endurance component explained 59.4% and 70.5% of variance in men and women, respectively, while additional components distinguished running, rowing, and physical work capacity. Women exhibited stronger relationships among endurance and other physical performance characteristics. A four-test battery reconstructed 67.6% and 73.5% of the information contained in the full battery in men and women, respectively. Conclusion: Common endurance tests provide complementary rather than interchangeable information, and a reduced battery can efficiently characterize multidimensional physical performance while substantially reducing testing demands.
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.