Validity of a Taekwondo-Specific Test to Measure Vo 2peak and the Heart Rate Deflection Point
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sant'Ana, J, Franchini, E, Murias, JM, and Diefenthaeler, F. Validity of a taekwondo-specific test to measure VO2peak and the heart rate deflection point. J Strength Cond Res 33(9): 2523-2529, 2019-This study investigated whether the progressive specific taekwondo test (PSTT) is a valid test to measure peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) and the heart rate deflection point (HRDP) in taekwondo athletes. Eighteen male black belt athletes (25.3 ± 4.8 years; 8.2 ± 4.7 years of practice; 171.8 ± 4.7 cm; 76.1 ± 8.2 kg, and 13.1 ± 2.9% body fat) involved in regional- and national-level competitions performed the PSTT and an incremental treadmill test (IT). The following variables were analyzed: VO2peak, respiratory quotient, oxygen consumption at the HRDP (VO2HRDP), peak heart rate (HRpeak), HRDP, and peak posttest blood lactate concentration. During the PSTT, the peak kick frequency (FKpeak) and kick frequency at the HRDP (FKHRDP) were also obtained. During the IT, the peak speed and the speed at the HRDP were identified by the Dmax method (the first and last points of the curve were connected by a straight line, and the most distant point of the curve to the line was considered as the HRDP). No differences were observed between VO2 responses during the PSTT and IT (p > 0.05). VO2peak and VO2HRDP presented bias (1.3 ml·kg·min and -0.78 ml·kg·min, respectively) derived from the Bland and Altman plots, with the 95% limits of agreement indicating that the differences between the 2 measures can reach 11% for VO2peak and 17% for VO2HRDP. The PSTT is a valid tool to assess aerobic power and capacity in taekwondo athletes based on direct comparisons to a treadmill test. The test presents more specific variables for the assessment and training of taekwondo athletes, such as FKpeak and FKHRDP, which can be used to determine and control the effects of training and help coaches in prescribing training programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".