MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063347100 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181e4ffe6

Estimation of Oxygen Uptake From Heart Rate and Ratings of Perceived Exertion in Young Soccer Players

2011· article· en· W2063347100 on OpenAlexaff
Del P. Wong, Christopher Carling, Anis Chaouachi, Alexandre Dellal, Carlo Castagna, Karim Chamari, David G. Behm

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart rateVO2 maxPerceived exertionStep testPhysical therapyTest (biology)Regression analysisMathematicsMedicineStatisticsBlood pressureSignificant differenceInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to estimate the oxygen uptake (&OV0312;O2) in elite youth soccer players using measures of heart rate (HR) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPEs). Forty-six regional-level male youth soccer players (∼13 years) participated in 2 VO(2)max tests. Data for HR, RPE, and VO(2) were simultaneously recorded during the VO(2)max tests with incremental running speed. Regression equations were derived from the first VO(2)max test. Two weeks later, all players performed the same VO(2)max test to validate the developed regression equations. There were no significant differences between the estimated values in the first test and actual values in the second test. During the continuous endurance exercise, the combination of percentage of maximal HR (%HRmax) and RPE measures gave similar estimation of %VO(2)max (R = 83%) in comparison to %HRmax alone (R = 81%). However, the estimation of VO(2) using combined %HRmax and RPE was not satisfactory (R = 45-46%). Therefore, the use of %HRmax (without RPE) to estimate %VO(2)max could be a useful tool in young soccer players during field-based continuous endurance testing and training. Specifically, coaches can use the %HRmax to quantify internal loads (%VO(2)max) and subsequently implement continuous endurance training at appropriate intensities. Furthermore, it seems that RPE is more useful as a measure of internal load during noncontinuous (e.g., intermittent and sprint) exercises but not to estimate %VO(2)max during continuous aerobic exercise (R = 59%).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207