PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to cross-validate existing VO2max prediction equations on samples of aerobically trained males and females. METHODS: A total of 142 aerobically trained males (mean +/- SD; 39.0 +/- 11.1 yr, N = 93) and females (39.7 +/- 10.1 yr, N = 49) performed a maximal incremental test to determine actual VO2max on a cycle ergometer. The predicted VO2max values from 18 equations (nine for each gender) were compared with actual VO2max by examining the constant error (CE), standard error of estimate (SEE), correlation coefficient (r), and total error (TE). RESULTS: The results of this investigation indicated that all of the equations resulted in significant (P < 0.006) CE values ranging from -216 to 1415 mL x min(-1) for the males and 132 to 1037 mL x min(-1) for the females. In addition the SEE, r, and TE values ranged from 266 to 609 mL x min(-1), 0.36 to 0.88, and 317 to 1535 mL x min(-1), respectively. Furthermore, the lowest TE values for the males and females represented 10% and 12% of the mean actual VO2max values, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the analysis indicated that the two equations using age, body weight, and the power output achieved at VO2 as predictor variables had the lowest SEE (7.7-9.8% of actual VO2max) and TE (10-12% of actual VO2max) values and are recommended for estimating VO2max in aerobically trained males and females. The magnitude of the TE values (>or= 20% of actual VO2max) associated with the remaining 16 equations, however, were too large to be of practical value for estimating VO2max.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to cross-validate existing VO2max prediction equations on samples of aerobically trained males and females. METHODS: A total of 142 aerobically trained males (mean +/- SD; 39.0 +/- 11.1 yr, N = 93) and females (39.7 +/- 10.1 yr, N = 49) performed a maximal incremental test to determine actual VO2max on a cycle ergometer. The predicted VO2max values from 18 equations (nine for each gender) were compared with actual VO2max by examining the constant error (CE), standard error of estimate (SEE), correlation coefficient (r), and total error (TE). RESULTS: The results of this investigation indicated that all of the equations resulted in significant (P < 0.006) CE values ranging from -216 to 1415 mL x min(-1) for the males and 132 to 1037 mL x min(-1) for the females. In addition the SEE, r, and TE values ranged from 266 to 609 mL x min(-1), 0.36 to 0.88, and 317 to 1535 mL x min(-1), respectively. Furthermore, the lowest TE values for the males and females represented 10% and 12% of the mean actual VO2max values, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the analysis indicated that the two equations using age, body weight, and the power output achieved at VO2 as predictor variables had the lowest SEE (7.7-9.8% of actual VO2max) and TE (10-12% of actual VO2max) values and are recommended for estimating VO2max in aerobically trained males and females. The magnitude of the TE values (>or= 20% of actual VO2max) associated with the remaining 16 equations, however, were too large to be of practical value for estimating VO2max.
Authors: Joëlle J E Janssen; Bart Lagerwaard; Mojtaba Porbahaie; Arie G Nieuwenhuizen; Huub F J Savelkoul; R J Joost van Neerven; Jaap Keijer; Vincent C J de Boer Journal: Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-01-10 Impact factor: 4.310