Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8817118›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology1996

The relationship between power output and endurance: a brief review.

R H Morton, D J Hodgson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. The critical power model for intermittent exercise.European journal of applied physiology · 2004
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A mathematical model for quantifying training.European journal of applied physiology · 2009
    Article
  16. The critical power and related whole-body bioenergetic models.European journal of applied physiology · 2006
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Methods to determine aerobic endurance.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2002
    Review
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

2 authors.

R H MortonDepartment of Statistics, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
D J Hodgson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is well established that for work requiring high power output, endurance time is short, and that low power outputs can be maintained for long periods. Parameters describing this relationship are important in characterising work performance and the capacity of humans as a source of mechanical power. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief review of the available literature investigating this relationship and its parameters. Most experimental data reflect measurements of endurance times over a range of constant power outputs on the cycle ergometer. Early graphical analyses of these data have been superseded by curve fitting, which in turn has led to establishment of the two component hyperbolic model now embodied in the critical power test. This model has been modified and extended in various ways to account for its shortcomings. In addition, a number of different exercise forms have been studied, and the effects of a variety of secondary factors (training status, age, sex, for example) on the parameters have also been investigated.

Indexed as

Energy MetabolismPhysical EnduranceAnaerobiosisExerciseHumansMathematicsModels, Biological

Identifiers

PMID8817118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.