Reliability and Validity of the 6-Minute Step Test for Clinical Assessment of Cardiorespiratory Fitness in People at Risk of Cardiovascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Giacomantonio, N, Morrison, P, Rasmussen, R, and MacKay-Lyons, MJ. Reliability and validity of the 6-minute step test for clinical assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness in people at risk of cardiovascular disease. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1376-1382, 2020-The purpose of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability and validity of the 6-minute step test (6MST) as a potential assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) of people at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). A prospective, cross-sectional, correlational study design was used. A single cohort of 30 adults with 2 or more risk factors for CVD was recruited. Exercise tests were scheduled on 2 days, separated by 1 week. Validity was determined by comparing 6MST results with those obtained in a symptom-limited treadmill test and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Main outcome variables were peak heart rate (HRpeak) and peak oxygen consumption (V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak) measured during the 6MST, treadmill test, and 6MWT. Test-retest reliability of HRpeak and V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak during the 6MST was very strong (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.97 and ICC, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97, respectively). Correlations were also very strong between 6MST and treadmill test HRpeak (r = 0.81) and between 6MST and treadmill test V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak (r = 0.88). Correlations were moderate between 6MST HRpeak and 6MWT steady-state HR (r = 0.57) and strong between 6MST V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak and 6MWT steady-state V[Combining Dot Above]O2 (r = 0.70). The 6MST seems to be a reliable, valid option for assessing CRF of people at risk of CVD in a broad range of clinical settings. Providing practical, accessible tests will help facilitate the goal of establishing CRF as a clinical vital sign. The next step in the development of the 6MST should be to identify the most appropriate 6MST predictor variables to estimate V[Combining Dot Above]O2max.
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 | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".