Running Performance as an Indicator of VO2max: Distance Effects

Vickers, Jr; Ross, R. T.

doi:10.21236/ada445595

Cited by 4 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Distance-VOzmax Replication Running performance often is used to evaluate aerobic capacity. A previous review indicated that the validity of running performance increased with distance up to 2 km; validity was constant from 2 km onward (Vickers, 2001). ^ Vickers's (2001) review was undertaken to address several questions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The reference lists for articles that contained at least one useful correlation were examined to identify other studies that might report V02raax-running performance correlations. The references identified in this process were compared with the list of articles covered in the earlier review (Vickers, 2001). New articles were examined to see whether they contained results that could be used in this review.…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The list was compared with the citations in Vickers (2001) to determine which work had been examined previously. Those dissertations and theses not covered in the earlier review were examined to see whether they reported either correlations that would be used in this review or individual data that could be used to compute correlations.…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Miscellaneous short {<1,850 m; n = 7) and long (>1,850 m; n = 9) runs were general groups that included all correlations for distances represented by just 1 or 2 correlations in the data set. This model was constructed using the same rules as the TxT model in Vickers (2001) . The specific groups included differ because of differences in the data available for the analyses (see Appendix B for original model).…”

Section: Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The specific groups included differ because of differences in the data available for the analyses (see Appendix B for original model). C. The PW model developed by Vickers (2001) regressed Zupa, on the logarithm of distance for runs <2 km, then estimated a constant value for runs >2 km.…”

Section: Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Running Performance as an Indicator of VO(2max): A Replication of Distance Effects

Vickers¹

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Running Performance as an Indicator of VO(2max): A Replication of Distance Effects

Vickers¹

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Walk Tests as Indicators of aerobic Capacity

Vickers¹

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modeling Run Test Validity: A Meta-Analytic Approach

Vickers¹

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research has been conducted in compliance with all applicable Federal Regulations governing the protection of human subjects. No human subjects were directly involved in this research.Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. Modeling Run Test Validity SUMMARY BackgroundMilitary physical fitness tests (PFTs) connmonly include a distance run to estimate aerobic fitness. This use of run tests is justifiable because performance is related to laboratory measurements of maximal oxygen uptake {V02max) ■ V02max is the accepted reference standard for measuring aerobic capacity. ObjectiveThis review tested the hypothesis that endurance run tests are equally valid for different types of people. ApproachLiterature searches identified 133 studies relating laboratory VOamax measurements to performance on run tests. These studies involved 1 or more endurance runs. An endurance run was defined as one that was 2:2 km in distance or ^12 min in duration. Data on validity, population attributes, and research methods were coded. Hedges and Olkin's metaanalysis procedures were used develop a mathematical model to predict run test validity. ResultsAverage validity was moderately high (r = .75), but could vary between r = .52 and r = .84 in different test situations. Run test validity was not related to the age, gender, fitness level, or running experience of the people who were tested. Validity was related to the type of run test (T for "type," 1 = fixed-distance; 2 = fixed-time) and the sample variability of VOzmax (SDV02max for standard deviation of V02max) . The equation to predict validity based on these two variables was zu/ = -059 + (.115*SDV02max) + (.197*T). The equation coefficients indicate that validity was higher in samples with greater VOamax variation and when a fixed-time run test was used. Publication bias, low power of the studies reviewed, and other potential sources of bias had little effect on £he findings.

show abstract

Running Performance as an Indicator of VO2max: Distance Effects

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Running Performance as an Indicator of VO(2max): A Replication of Distance Effects

Running Performance as an Indicator of VO(2max): A Replication of Distance Effects

Walk Tests as Indicators of aerobic Capacity

Modeling Run Test Validity: A Meta-Analytic Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About