Appropriate scaling approach for evaluating peak VO2 development in Southern Chinese 8 to 16 years old
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate scaling approaches for evaluating the development of peak VO2 and improving the identification of low cardiopulmonary fitness in Southern Chinese children and adolescents. METHODS: Nine hundred and twenty Chinese children and adolescents (8 to 16 years) underwent graded cardiopulmonary exercise test on a treadmill until volitional exhaustion. Peak VO2 was corrected for the effects of body mass by ratio or allometric scaling. Z score equations for predicting peak VO2 were developed. Correlations between scaled peak VO2, z scores, body size and age were tested to examine the effectiveness of the approach. RESULTS: Eight hundred and fifty-two participants (48% male) were included in the analyses. Absolute peak VO2 significantly increased with age in both sexes (both P<0.05), while ratio-scaled peak VO2 increased only in males (P<0.05). Allometrically scaled peak VO2 increased from 11 years in both sexes, plateauing by 12 years in girls and continuing to rise until 15 years in boys. Allometically scaled peak VO2 was not correlated with body mass, but remained correlated with height and age in all but the older girls. Peak VO2 z score was not correlated with body mass, height or age. CONCLUSIONS: Absolute and allometric scaled peak VO2 values are provided for Hong Kong Chinese children and adolescents by age and sex. Peak VO2 z scores improve the evaluation of cardiopulmonary fitness, allowing comparisons across ages and sex and will likely provide a better metric for tracking change over time in children and adolescents, regardless of body size and age.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".