MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

THE EFFECTS OF PROLONGED EXERCISE ON THE RUNNING ECONOMY OF TRAINED AND UNTRAINED INDIVIDUALS

2003· article· en· W2003227670 on OpenAlexaff
Jon Bula, Edward C. Rhodes, R. H. Langill

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRunning economyTreadmillMedicinePhysical therapyIncremental exerciseVO2 maxPsychologyAnimal scienceHeart rateInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research suggests that fatigue induced by long duration exercise may adversely influence running economy (RE). However, it is not fully understood how this fatigue affects the RE of individuals that are highly trained (HT) compared to relatively untrained (UT). PURPOSE To investigate the effects of a prolonged run at the ventilatory threshold (Tvent) on the RE of HT runners compared to UT individuals. METHODS Initially, 9 UT (VO2peak 51.3 ± 1.7 ml·kg−1·min−1) and 8 HT (VO2peak 71.3 ± 7.1 ml·kg−1·min−1) male subjects performed a continuous, incremental running protocol to determine Tvent. Measures of RE were obtained at 2.68 m·s−1 and at a velocity corresponding to Tvent. Subjects then completed a treadmill run at their Tvent velocity for a maximum of 60 minutes or until volitional fatigue. Immediately upon completion of the prolonged run, measures of RE were again determined at 2.68 m·s−1 and Tvent. RESULTS Initial test measures for RE were nonsignificant between the groups at 2.68 m·s−1 for VO2 in ml·kg−1·min−1 (HT 37.6 ± 2.7 vs. UT 37.4 ± 2.1; p = 0.813) and in L·min−1 (HT 2.56 ± 0.28 vs. UT 2.88 ± 0.50; p = 0.121). While the velocity at Tvent in m·s−1 was significantly different between groups (HT 3.77 ± 0.35 vs. UT 3.11 ± 0.13; p < 0.001) the RE at Tvent was nonsignificantly different for VO2 in ml·kg−1·km−1 (HT 233.9 ± 14.7 vs. UT 231.9 ± 12.5; p = 0.761). Following the prolonged run the HT runners were more economical at 2.68 m·s−1 than the UT group for VO2 in L·min−1 (2.47 ± 0.27 vs. 2.91 ± 0.40; p < 0.05). As well, there were significant differences in the duration of the prolonged run for the two groups (HT: 60·0min vs. UT: 43 ± 10 min; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION The RE of HT and UT individuals would seem to be comparable. However, following a prolonged run at Tvent, the economy of the UT group is adversely affected by fatigue suggesting that RE values are more stable in individuals that are HT compared to UT.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicSports Performance and Training→French-language works237,207→