(Re)assessment of the <scp>COSMED</scp> Quark <scp>CPET</scp> and <scp>VO2Master</scp> Pro Systems for Measuring Pulmonary Gas Exchange and Ventilation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We assessed the validity, reliability, and transferability of gas exchange and ventilatory variables from two commonly used metabolic measurement systems (COSMED Quark and VO2Master Pro). Two identical devices from each system were independently connected to a metabolic simulator (VacuMed), and 2 min of steady‐state data was recorded at simulated oxygen uptake (V̇O2) of 1, 2, 3, and 4 L∙min−1 achieved through minute ventilation (V̇E) of 30, 60, 105, and 150 L∙min−1. Each metabolic analyzer recorded data three times for each “intensity” in a randomized order, and assessments were completed on two separate days. Douglas bag‐based measurements were also made once at each simulated “intensity”. Measured steady‐state data (average of final 1.5 min) for both V̇O2 (STPD) and V̇E (ATPS) were compared with simulated values to assess validity, repeated values between and within days assessed reliability, and between‐device comparisons provided transferability. Including both COSMED devices at all intensities, the mean percent error for V̇O2 was 3.5% (range: −2.5%–8.1%) and, for V̇E, was 2.0% (−0.5%–7.6%). For the VO2Master, these values averaged 0.6% (−9.3%–4.8%) and 1.1% (−6.3%–4.0%) for V̇O2 and V̇E, respectively. Mean percent error for Douglas Bag was 1.5%, −3.7%, −3.1%, and −2.0% for 1, 2, 3, and 4 L∙min−1, respectively. Between‐day differences (reliability) for V̇O2 of both COSMED devices ranged from −4.1% to 2.2% (mean 0.1%) and, for both VO2Masters, between −1.6% and 11.1% (mean 1.2%). Between‐device differences (transferability) ranged from −3.5% to 0.5% (mean 1.3%) for COSMED and from −11.0% to 3.6% (mean 0.0%) for VO2Master. Mean values and ranges for V̇E were similar. When used appropriately in laboratory settings, the COSMED Quark and VO2Master Pro systems provide gas exchange and ventilatory data within an acceptable range for metabolic testing equipment that are both reliable and transferable between optimally performing devices.
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 | 0.037 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".