1. Is the 5-Minute Time-Trial Cycling Test a Valid Predictor of Maximal Oxygen Uptake? An External Cross-Validation Study.
- Author
-
Borszcz, Fernando Klitzke, Ferreira Tramontin, Artur, de Lucas, Ricardo Dantas, and Pereira Costa, Vitor
- Subjects
PSYCHOLOGY of athletes ,PREDICTION models ,BODY mass index ,SPORTS ,RESEARCH methodology evaluation ,PROBABILITY theory ,DYNAMICS ,AEROBIC capacity ,META-analysis ,DESCRIPTIVE statistics ,CYCLING ,RESEARCH methodology ,PHYSICAL fitness ,OXYGEN consumption ,ATHLETIC ability ,EXERCISE tests ,COMPARATIVE studies ,REGRESSION analysis - Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to cross-validate a recently proposed equation for the prediction of maximal oxygen uptake ( V ˙ O 2 max) in cycling exercise by using the average power output normalized by the body mass from a 5-minute time trial (RPO
5-min ) as the independent variable. Further, the study aimed to update the predictive equation using Bayesian informative prior distributions and meta-analysis. Methods: On different days, 49 male cyclists performed an incremental graded exercise test until exhaustion and a 5-minute time trial on a stationary cycle ergometer. We compared the actual V ˙ O 2 max with the predicted value obtained from the RPO5-min , using a modified Bayesian Bland–Altman agreement analysis. In addition, this study updated the data on the linear regression between V ˙ O 2 max and RPO5-min , by incorporating information from a previous study as a Bayesian informative prior distribution or via meta-analysis. Results: On average, the predicted V ˙ O 2 max using RPO5-min underestimated the actual V ˙ O 2 max by −6.6 mL·kg–1 ·min–1 (95% credible interval, −8.6 to −4.7 mL·kg–1 ·min–1 ). The lower and upper 95% limits of agreement were −17.2 (−22.7 to −12.3) and 3.8 (−1.0 to 9.5) mL·kg–1 ·min–1 , respectively. When the current study's data were analyzed using the previously published data as a Bayesian informative prior distribution, the accuracy of predicting sample means was found to be better when compared with the data combined via meta-analyses. Conclusions: The proposed equation presented systematic bias in our sample, in which the prediction underestimated the actual V ˙ O 2 max. We provide an updated equation using the previous one as the prior distribution, which could be generalized to a greater audience of cyclists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF