IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0235567.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Severe-intensity constant-work-rate cycling indicates that ramp incremental cycling underestimates ⩒o2max in a heterogeneous cohort of sedentary individuals

Author

Listed:
  • Avigdor D Arad
  • Kaitlyn Bishop
  • Deena Adimoolam
  • Jeanine B Albu
  • Fred J DiMenna

Abstract

In the absence of a ⩒o2-work-rate plateau, debate continues regarding the best way to verify that the peak ⩒o2 achieved during incremental exercise (⩒o2peak) is the “true ⩒o2max.” Oft-used “secondary criteria” have been questioned in conjunction with the contention that a severe-intensity constant-work-rate “verification bout” should be considered the “gold standard.” The purpose of this study was to compare the ⩒o2peak during ramp incremental cycling (RAMP-INC) by a heterogeneous (with respect to body composition and sex) cohort of sedentary individuals with the ⩒o2peak during severe-intensity constant-work-rate cycling (CWR) performed after RAMP-INC at the highest work rate achieved. A secondary purpose was to determine the degree to which traditional and newly-proposed age-dependent secondary criteria (RER, HR) identified RAMP-INC which CWR confirmed were characterized by a submaximal ⩒o2peak. Thirty-five healthy male (n = 19: 33.4 ± 6.3 yrs) and female (26.8 ± 3.6 yrs) sedentary participants performed RAMP-INC followed by CWR. The ⩒o2peak values from the two tests were correlated (r = 0.96; p

Suggested Citation

  • Avigdor D Arad & Kaitlyn Bishop & Deena Adimoolam & Jeanine B Albu & Fred J DiMenna, 2020. "Severe-intensity constant-work-rate cycling indicates that ramp incremental cycling underestimates ⩒o2max in a heterogeneous cohort of sedentary individuals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0235567
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235567
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235567&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0235567?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0235567. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.