Literature DB >> 1396632

Scaling physiological measurements for individuals of different body size.

A M Nevill1, R Ramsbottom, C Williams.   

Abstract

This paper examines how selected physiological performance variables, such as maximal oxygen uptake, strength and power, might best be scaled for subject differences in body size. The apparent dilemma between using either ratio standards or a linear adjustment method to scale was investigated by considering how maximal oxygen uptake (l.min-1), peak and mean power output (W) might best be adjusted for differences in body mass (kg). A curvilinear power function model was shown to be theoretically, physiologically and empirically superior to the linear models. Based on the fitted power functions, the best method of scaling maximum oxygen uptake, peak and mean power output, required these variables to be divided by body mass, recorded in the units kg 2/3. Hence, the power function ratio standards (ml.kg-2/3.min-1) and (W.kg-2/3) were best able to describe a wide range of subjects in terms of their physiological capacity, i.e. their ability to utilise oxygen or record power maximally, independent of body size. The simple ratio standards (ml.kg-1.min-1) and (W.kg-1) were found to best describe the same subjects according to their performance capacities or ability to run which are highly dependent on body size. The appropriate model to explain the experimental design effects on such ratio standards was shown to be log-normal rather than normal. Simply by taking logarithms of the power function ratio standard, identical solutions for the design effects are obtained using either ANOVA or, by taking the unscaled physiological variable as the dependent variable and the body size variable as the covariate, ANCOVA methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1396632     DOI: 10.1007/bf00705066

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol        ISSN: 0301-5548


  8 in total

1.  Maximal oxygen intake as an objective measure of cardio-respiratory performance.

Authors:  H L TAYLOR; E BUSKIRK; A HENSCHEL
Journal:  J Appl Physiol       Date:  1955-07       Impact factor: 3.531

2.  Fallacy of per-weight and per-surface area standards, and their relation to spurious correlation.

Authors:  J M TANNER
Journal:  J Appl Physiol       Date:  1949-07       Impact factor: 3.531

3.  Use of weight-adjusted oxygen uptake scores that avoid spurious correlations.

Authors:  V L Katch; F I Katch
Journal:  Res Q       Date:  1974-12

4.  Correlational v ratio adjustments of body weight in exercise-oxygen studies.

Authors:  V Katch
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  1972-11       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  Use of the oxygen-body weight ratio in correlational analyses: spurious correlations and statistical considerations.

Authors:  V L Katch
Journal:  Med Sci Sports       Date:  1973

6.  Maximal oxygen intake prediction in young and middle-aged males.

Authors:  P M Ribisl; W A Kachadorian
Journal:  J Sports Med Phys Fitness       Date:  1969-03       Impact factor: 1.637

7.  Maximal exercise performance and lean leg volume in men and women.

Authors:  E M Winter; F B Brookes; E J Hamley
Journal:  J Sports Sci       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.337

8.  Some physiological demands of a half-marathon race on recreational runners.

Authors:  C Williams; M L Nute
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 13.800

  8 in total
  57 in total

Review 1.  Applied physiology and game analysis of rugby union.

Authors:  Grant Duthie; David Pyne; Sue Hooper
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 2.  Muscle strength testing: use of normalisation for body size.

Authors:  Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  Scaling lower-limb isokinetic strength for biological maturation and body size in adolescent basketball players.

Authors:  Humberto Moreira Carvalho; Manuel Coelho-e-Silva; João Valente-dos-Santos; Rui Soles Gonçalves; Renaat Philippaerts; Robert Malina
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 3.078

4.  Does living in urban or rural settings affect aspects of physical fitness in children? An allometric approach.

Authors:  P D Tsimeas; A L Tsiokanos; Y Koutedakis; N Tsigilis; S Kellis
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 13.800

5.  Body size as a determinant of the 1-h cycling record at sea level and altitude.

Authors:  Daniel P Heil
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 3.078

6.  Scaling maximal oxygen uptake to predict cycling time-trial performance in the field: a non-linear approach.

Authors:  A M Nevill; S A Jobson; G S Palmer; T S Olds
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2005-05-20       Impact factor: 3.078

7.  Scaling of muscle power to body size: the effect of stretch-shortening cycle.

Authors:  Goran Markovic; Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2005-07-09       Impact factor: 3.078

8.  Optimal power-to-mass ratios when predicting flat and hill-climbing time-trial cycling.

Authors:  A M Nevill; S A Jobson; R C R Davison; A E Jeukendrup
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2006-05-10       Impact factor: 3.078

9.  Allometric scaling of strength measurements to body size.

Authors:  J P Folland; T M Mc Cauley; A G Williams
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2008-01-03       Impact factor: 3.078

10.  Scaling or normalising maximum oxygen uptake to predict 1-mile run time in boys.

Authors:  Alan Nevill; Thomas Rowland; Donna Goff; Leslie Martel; Lisa Ferrone
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-04-09       Impact factor: 3.078

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.