MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Critical Power Measurement

2016· article· en· W2465089217 on OpenAlexaff
Felipe Mattioni Maturana, Daniel A. Keir, Kaitlin M. McLay, Guillaume Y. Millet, Juan M. Murias

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCycle ergometerCyclingMathematicsLimits of agreementAnimal scienceSteady state (chemistry)Lactate thresholdTime trialBlood lactateMedicineInternal medicineChemistryHeart rateNuclear medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical Power (CP) represents the highest sustainable power output (PO) at which physiological steady-state can be achieved.. In cycling exercise, CP is traditionally derived from the PO versus time-to-exhaustion (TTE) relationship based on 3-5 TTE trials ranging from 1 to 20 min. Recently, a 3-min all-out test (3M) has been proposed for CP estimation. However, CP derived from this test has not been externally validated (i.e., corroborating steady-state lactate concentration [La] for prolonged durations of cycling at the value associated to CP). PURPOSE:To compare CP derived from 5 TTE and the 3M test, and to validate these values against a maximal lactate steady-state (MLSS) test. METHODS:Seven healthy young subjects (28±3 yrs; 68.4±7.3 kg; 175±9 cm) were tested. A ramp incremental test to exhaustion was performed on a cycle ergometer (Velotron Dynafit Pro, Racer Mate, Seattle, WA, USA) to determine VO2peak, gas exchange threshold (GET) (Quark CPET, Cosmed, Rome, Italy), and peak power output (POpeak). CP from the 5 TTE test was calculated with a 2-parameter hyperbolic model (HYP). The 3M test was performed using the linear mode of the cycle ergometer, and CP was calculated as the mean PO of the last 30 s of the test. MLSS was considered as the highest PO during a 30-min constant load ride with a variation in [La] ≤ 1.0 mM·L-1 between the last 20 min of exercise ([La] measured every 5 min). RESULTS:Mean VO2peak, GET, and POpeak were 4.30±0.67 L·min-1, 2.60±0.30 L·min-1, and 383±53 W, respectively. PO at CP HYP (267±39 W), CP 3M (258±52 W), and MLSS (246±37) were not different (p>0.05). Bland-Altman plots comparing CP from HYP and 3M against the PO at MLSS showed no significant biases but wide limits of agreement (LOA) ranging from -8 to 51 W (bias=21 W) and from -43 to 68 W (bias=13 W), for HYP and 3M, respectively. When comparing CP from 3M to HYP, the LOA ranged from -43 to 26W (bias=-9 W). CONCLUSIONS:Although the POs associated to CP as estimated from the 5 TTE, the 3-min all-out test, and MLSS were not different, the large variability in the CP amongst methods results in poor accuracy of CP estimation and detracts from the practical application of this test.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0750.032

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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