Validation of the FAST skating protocol to predict aerobic power in ice hockey players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few studies have reported a sport-specific protocol to measure the aerobic power of ice hockey players using a predictive process. The purpose of our study was to validate an ice hockey aerobic field test on players of varying ages, abilities, and levels. The Faught Aerobic Skating Test (FAST) uses an on-ice continuous skating protocol on a course measuring 160 feet (48.8 m) using a CD to pace the skater with a beep signal to cross the starting line at each end of the course. The FAST incorporates the principle of increasing workload at measured time intervals during a continuous skating exercise. Step-wise multiple regression modelling was used to determine the estimate of aerobic power. Participants completed a maximal aerobic power test using a modified Bruce incremental treadmill protocol, as well as the on-ice FAST. Normative data were collected on 406 ice hockey players (291 males, 115 females) ranging in age from 9 to 25 y. A regression to predict maximum aerobic power was developed using body mass (kg), height (m), age (y), and maximum completed lengths of the FAST as the significant predictors of skating aerobic power (adjusted R2 = 0.387, SEE = 7.25 mL.kg-1.min-1, p < 0.0001). These results support the application of the FAST in estimating aerobic power among male and female competitive ice hockey players between the ages of 9 and 25 years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".