Author
Listed:
- Jonathan Wagner
- Max Niemeyer
- Denis Infanger
- Timo Hinrichs
- Clement Guerra
- Christopher Klenk
- Karsten Königstein
- Christian Cajochen
- Arno Schmidt-Trucksäss
- Raphael Knaier
Abstract
Objective: This study compared the robustness of a V˙O2-plateau definition and a verification-phase protocol to day-to-day and diurnal variations in determining the true V˙O2max. Further, the additional value of a verification-phase was investigated. Methods: Eighteen adults performed six cardiorespiratory fitness tests at six different times of the day (diurnal variation) as well as a seventh test at the same time the sixth test took place (day-to-day variation). A verification-phase was performed immediately after each test, with a stepwise increase in intensity to 50%, 70%, and 105% of the peak power output. Results: Participants mean V˙O2peak was 56 ± 8 mL/kg/min. Gwet’s AC1 values (95% confidence intervals) for the day-to-day and diurnal variations were 0.64 (0.22, 1.00) and 0.71 (0.42, 0.99) for V˙O2-plateau and for the verification-phase 0.69 (0.31, 1.00) and 0.07 (−0.38, 0.52), respectively. In 66% of the tests, performing the verification-phase added no value, while, in 32% and 2%, it added uncertain value and certain value, respectively, in the determination of V˙O2max. Conclusion: Compared to V˙O2-plateau the verification-phase shows lower reliability, increases costs and only adds certain value in 2% of cases.
Suggested Citation
Jonathan Wagner & Max Niemeyer & Denis Infanger & Timo Hinrichs & Clement Guerra & Christopher Klenk & Karsten Königstein & Christian Cajochen & Arno Schmidt-Trucksäss & Raphael Knaier, 2021.
"Verification-phase tests show low reliability and add little value in determining V̇O2max in young trained adults,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, January.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0245306
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245306
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0245306. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.