The Development and Reliability of a Repeated Anaerobic Cycling Test in Female Ice Hockey Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop and assess the reliability of a repeated anaerobic power cycling test designed to mimic the repeated sprinting nature of the sport of ice hockey. Nineteen female varsity ice hockey players (mean X +/- SD age, height and body mass = 21 +/- 2 yr, 166.6 +/- 6.3 cm and 62.3 +/- 7.3) completed 3 trials of a repeated anaerobic power test on a Monark cycle ergometer on different days. The test consisted of "all-out" cycling for 5 seconds separated by 10 seconds of low-intensity cycling, repeated 4 times. The relative load factor used for the resistance setting was equal to 0.095 kg per kilogram body mass. There was no significant difference between the peak 5-second power output (PO), mean PO, or the fatigue index (%) among the 3 different trials. The peak 5-second PO was 702.6 +/- 114.8 w and 11.3 +/- 1.1 w x kg, whereas the mean PO across the 4 repeats was 647.1 +/- 96.3 w and 10.4 +/- 1.0 w x kg averaged for the 3 different tests. The fatigue index averaged 17.8 +/- 6.5%. The intraclass correlation coefficient for peak 5-second, mean PO, and fatigue index was 0.82, 0.86, and 0.82, respectively. This study reports the methodology of a repeated anaerobic power cycling test that was reliable for the measurement of PO and calculated fatigue index in varsity women ice hockey players and can be used as a laboratory-based assessment of repeated anaerobic fitness.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".