MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385578644 · doi:10.3389/fspor.2023.1143393

Comparing the reliability of muscle oxygen saturation with common performance and physiological markers across cycling exercise intensity

2023· article· en· W4385578644 on OpenAlexaff
Assaf Yogev, Jem Arnold, Hannah Nelson, David C. Clarke, Jordan A. Guenette, Ben C. Sporer, Michael S. Koehle

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sports and Active Living · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalSimon Fraser UniversitySpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRating of perceived exertionIntraclass correlationCyclingExercise intensityVO2 maxHeart rateAnaerobic exerciseTime trialMedicineReliability (semiconductor)Physical therapyInternal medicineCardiologyAnimal scienceBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Wearable near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) measurements of muscle oxygen saturation (SmO2) demonstrated good test–retest reliability at rest. We hypothesized SmO2 measured with the Moxy monitor at the vastus lateralis (VL) would demonstrate good reliability across intensities. For relative reliability, SmO2 will be lower than volume of oxygen consumption (V̇O2) and heart rate (HR), higher than concentration of blood lactate accumulation ([BLa]) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE). We aimed to estimate the reliability of SmO2 and common physiological measures across exercise intensities, as well as to quantify within-participant agreement between sessions. Methods Twenty-one trained cyclists completed two trials of an incremental multi-stage cycling test with 5 min constant workload steps starting at 1.0 watt per kg bodyweight (W·kg−1) and increasing by 0.5 W kg−1 per step, separated by 1 min passive recovery intervals until maximal task tolerance. SmO2, HR, V̇O2, [BLa], and RPE were recorded for each stage. Continuous measures were averaged over the final 60 s of each stage. Relative reliability at the lowest, median, and highest work stages was quantified as intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Absolute reliability and within-subject agreement were quantified as standard error of the measurement (SEM) and minimum detectable change (MDC). Results Comparisons between trials showed no significant differences within each exercise intensity for all outcome variables. ICC for SmO2 was 0.81–0.90 across exercise intensity. ICC for HR, V̇O2, [BLa], and RPE were 0.87–0.92, 0.73–0.97, 0.44–0.74, 0.29–0.70, respectively. SEM (95% CI) for SmO2 was 5 (3–7), 6 (4–9), and 7 (5–10)%, and MDC was 12%, 16%, and 18%. Discussion Our results demonstrate good-to-excellent test-retest reliability for SmO2 across intensity during an incremental multi-stage cycling test. V̇O2 and HR had excellent reliability, higher than SmO2. [BLa] and RPE had lower reliability than SmO2. Muscle oxygen saturation measured by wearable NIRS was found to have similar reliability to V̇O2 and HR, and higher than [BLa] and RPE across exercise intensity, suggesting that it is appropriate for everyday use as a non-invasive method of monitoring internal load alongside other metrics.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations36
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sports and Active LivingSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207