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 OpenAlex
Assaf Yogev, Jem Arnold, Hannah Nelson, David C. Clarke, Jordan A. Guenette, Ben C. Sporer, Michael S. Koehle

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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 (SmO 2 ) demonstrated good test–retest reliability at rest. We hypothesized SmO 2 measured with the Moxy monitor at the vastus lateralis (VL) would demonstrate good reliability across intensities. For relative reliability, SmO 2 will be lower than volume of oxygen consumption (V̇O 2 ) 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 SmO 2 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. SmO 2 , HR, V̇O 2 , [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 SmO 2 was 0.81–0.90 across exercise intensity. ICC for HR, V̇O 2 , [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 SmO 2 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 SmO 2 across intensity during an incremental multi-stage cycling test. V̇O 2 and HR had excellent reliability, higher than SmO 2 . [BLa] and RPE had lower reliability than SmO 2 . Muscle oxygen saturation measured by wearable NIRS was found to have similar reliability to V̇O 2 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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