Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) in studies of fatigue-induced postural control alterations in healthy adults: Scoping review of quantitative evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amongst the literature researching the effects of exercise-induced fatigue on postural control in healthy adults, many studies have used the Borg scales to document the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and have shown a broad range of RPE values. Our main aim was to map fatigue-induced RPE values in included publications. Secondary aims were to summarize the preference and purpose for the use of Borg scales within the included publications and to explore the potential associations between fatigue-induced RPE values and postural control changes. METHODS: Five databases (Ovid Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus) were systematically searched for synthesizing data among the publications that reported RPE values on the Borg RPE- and Category-Ratio (CR) 10 scales and also found fatigue effects on postural control in healthy adults. Spearman's rank correlations were conducted to assess potential associations between fatigue-induced RPE values and maximal postural control changes across the included publications (group data). RESULTS: 45 of 51 studies included in this review reported maximal RPE values following exercise and ranged from 10.4-20 (6-20 Borg RPE) or 0.9-10 (CR10) indicating "very light" or "very weak" to "maximal" exertions. The 6-20 Borg and CR10 scales were mainly used to assess cardiovascular and muscular exertion, respectively. The scales were used mostly to estimate fatigue levels (n = 45), and to a lesser extent to produce a specific exercise intensity (n = 5) and as the criterion for exercise termination (n = 1). In general, there was no significant association between RPE and postural control changes across studies. CONCLUSION: The broad range of RPE values and weak correlations may suggest that various fatigue levels can lead to postural control changes. However, one should be careful in comparing the extent of fatigue from RPE values and its potential effect on postural control in the light of many confounding factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".