MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109478099 · doi:10.1055/s-2007-964986

An On-Ice Aerobic Maximal Multistage Shuttle Skate Test for Elite Adolescent Hockey Players

2007· article· en· W2109478099 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Leone, L. Léger, Georges Larivière, Alain Steve Comtois

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyVO2 maxMulti-stage fitness testMathematicsAnimal sciencePhysical therapyMedicineHeart ratePhysical fitnessPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to design an on-ice test to predict V.O (2max) in ice hockey players. 30 elite hockey players (age 14.7 +/- 1.5 years) participated in this study. The oxygen uptake was assessed at submaximal and maximal velocities during an on-ice intermittent maximal multistage shuttle skate test with a 1-min/0.5-min work/rest ratio. The procedure consisted of skating back and forth on a distance of 45 m (stop and go) while following a pace fixed by an audible signal: initial velocity of 3.5 m . s (-1) with increments of 0.2 m . s (-1) every stage. The skating multistage aerobic test (SMAT) enabled the prediction of the V.O (2max) (ml . kg (-1) . min (-1)) from the maximal velocity (m . s (-1)) by means of the following regression equation: V.O (2max) = 18.07 x (maximal velocity) - 35.596 (r = 0.97, SEE = 3.01). The test-retest correlation was 0.92 and SEE = 0.56 stage (n = 23). Following the SMAT validation, an additional group of 112 elite male (age = 14.2 +/- 1.3 years) and 31 elite female (age = 14.0 +/- 1.2 years) ice hockey players performed both the 20-m shuttle run test and the SMAT, which was more specific and accurate to predict V.O (2max). The overall results suggest that the SMAT is highly specific, valid and reliable for the prediction of V.O (2max) of ice hockey players.

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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations31
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207