Predicting Cardiorespiratory Fitness Using the 20-m Shuttle Run Test: New Insights Using Nonlinear Allometry

Abstract

PURPOSE: Recently, doubts have been raised concerning the validity of the 20-m shuttle run test (20mSRT) to predict cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in youth. Despite these doubts, authors continue to provide powerful evidence that CRF can be predicted reliably using the 20mSRT albeit using contrasting models. Therefore, we aimed to compare a new linear model with an alternative allometric model to predict CRF (peak oxygen uptake, 𝑉 ̇O2peak) using 20mSRT. METHODS:The study included 148 adolescents (43% girls), aged 13.37 ± 1.84 years.Adolescents were randomly assigned to validation (n = 91) and cross-validation (n = 57) groups.𝑉 ̇O2peak was measured using a gas analyser in both maximal exercise tests in the laboratory as well as 20mSRT. Multiple linear regression methods were applied to develop the linear models using 20mSRT (Laps), BMI and body fat percentage. Alternative allometric models were also proposed/fitted using 20mSRT (Laps), height and body mass. RESULTS:The criterion validity of both the linear and the allomeric models were found to be acceptable R 2 =82.5% and 82.7% respectively, providing reassuring evidence that the 20mSRT can be used with confidence to predict CRF. However, the allometric model identified a heightto-mass ratio, not dissimilar to the inverse BMI (known to be a measure of leanness), to be associated with CRF. The allometric model also revealed that the rise in energy cost (𝑉 ̇O2peak) with increasing laps was exponential. This will more accurately reflect the non-linear rise in energy demand of shuttle running as the test progresses to exhaustion. CONCUSIONS: These observations provided powerful evidence that allometric models are more than satisfactory in terms of both criterion AND construct validity when predicting CRF (𝑉 ̇O2peak) using the 20mSRT.

An Investigation of the Utility of Waist Circumference Predicting Cardiorespiratory Fitness in School Children: A Cross-Sectional Study

“…CRF can be measured by laboratory tests, which are expensive and require specialized equipment, or by means of field-based tests [21], as well as by predictive equations [23]. According to a literature review, the most commonly used test for assessing CRF is the validated [24] 20mSRT, which can be conducted in big groups, e.g., in schools, and can be used to monitor the health of the population [19,25,26], though not all of the researchers support this view [27]. Lang et al (2018) recommend this test as a holistic health marker which can help to identify children and adolescents at risk of poor health [28].…”

Examining the mediating role of muscle quantity in adolescents: associations with adiposity, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular fitness, and cardiometabolic risk factors

“…In children and adolescents, decreases in health-related components of physical fitness impair daily activities and are associated with increased mortality in adults and older adults 8 . CRF stands out as an important marker of health status in adults and youth 9 , 10 , whose performance is probably associated with muscle strength. In general, low muscle mass and low CRF, can compromise and impair motor competence in adolescents with obesity 11 , reducing mobility and agility of children and adolescents 12 , as well as less participation in spontaneous physical activities 13 , especially in presence of body weight overload 14 .…”

Comparison of Several Anthropometric Indices Related to Body Fat in Predicting Cardiorespiratory Fitness in School-Aged Children—A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Study

“…The accurate assessment of CRF and BF levels requires specialistic equipment. Hence, CRF is often estimated by means of field-based tests, e.g., the 20 m shuttle run test (20 mSRT) and predictive equations [33,[36][37][38][39][40][41]; on the other hand, for BF distribution, for the estimation of %BF as well as for determining central obesity, WC measurements, anthropometric indices and estimating equations are used [10,17]. In both cases (BF ad CRF), it is much simpler, cheaper and does not require specialistic equipment or laboratory conditions.…”