Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9562161›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of sports medicine1998

Heart rate response to "off-road" running events in female athletes.

U Creagh, T Reilly, A M Nevill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of sports medicine, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Physiological Demands of Extreme Obstacle Course Racing: A Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Global positioning system and sport-specific testing.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2003
    Article
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

3 authors.

U CreaghCentre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, United Kingdom.
T Reilly
A M Nevill

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the growing popularity of off-road running events, little information is available about the physiological stress of such activities. The demands of such events are unique in terms of the rough surface of the terrain encountered as well as the underfoot vegetation and the gradient.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the physiological response of female athletes, as measured by heart rate, to three common off-road running events: cross country running (n = 15), fell running (n = 20), and orienteering (n = 25).

methodsHeart rate responses were recorded during cross country and fell races, and orienteering by means of short range radiotelemetry. Road running (n = 21) was also studied as a reference.

resultsThe mean heart rates for each event varied with the differing demands of the terrain. The highest (182 (10) beats/minute; mean (SD)) was for road running and the lowest (172 (10) beats/minute) for orienteering. Orienteering evoked a significantly more variable response than all other events (F4,100 = 112.4; p<0.01), with a range of 44 beats/minute (142-186 beats/minute) in the heart rate. This may be due to both the variability of the terrain and the additional technical aspect of this sport. There was a positive trend in the slope of the regression lines of heart rate against time for both road and cross country running, which was not evident in the fell runners or the orienteers. The latter events demonstrated no consistent pattern.

conclusionsIt is concluded that running off-road elicits a heart rate response that varies with the altering demands of surface, vegetation, and gradient.

Indexed as

Heart RateAdultAnalysis of VarianceExerciseFemaleHumansRunning

Identifiers

PMID9562161
PMCPMC1756057

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.