Literature DB >> 28902109

Validity and Reliability of the Stages Cycling Power Meter.

Cyril Granier1,2, Christophe Hausswirth1,3, Sylvain Dorel4, Yann Le Meur1,3.   

Abstract

Granier, C, Hausswirth, C, Dorel, S, and Le Meur, Y. Validity and reliability of the stages cycling power meter. J Strength Cond Res 34(12): 3554-3559, 2020-This study aimed to determine the validity and the reliability of the Stages power meter crank system (Boulder, United States) during several laboratory cycling tasks. Eleven trained subjects completed laboratory cycling trials on an indoor cycle fitted with SRM Professional and Stages systems. The trials consisted of an incremental test at 100 W, 200 W, 300 W, 400 W, and four 7-s sprints. The level of pedaling asymmetry was determined for each cycling intensity during a similar protocol completed on a Lode Excalibur Sport ergometer. The reliability of Stages and SRM power meters was compared by repeating the incremental test during a test-retest protocol on a Cyclus 2 ergometer. Over power ranges of 100-1,250 W, the Stages system produced trivial to small differences compared with the SRM (standardized typical error values of 0.06, 0.24, and 0.08 for the incremental, sprint, and combined trials, respectively). A large correlation was reported between the difference in power output (PO) between the 2 systems and the level of pedaling asymmetry (r = 0.58, p < 0.001). Recalculating PO of the Stages system according to the level of pedaling asymmetry provided only marginal improvements in PO measures. The reliability of the Stages power meter at the submaximal intensities was similar to the SRM Professional model (coefficient of variation: 2.1 and 1.3% for Stages and SRM, respectively). The Stages system is a suitable device for PO measurements, except when a typical error of measurement <3.0% over power ranges of 100-1,250 W is expected.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 28902109     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002189

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  5 in total

1.  Validity and Reliability of the PowerTap P1 Pedals Power Meter.

Authors:  Jesús G Pallarés; José Ramón Lillo-Bevia
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.988

2.  Are the Assioma Favero Power Meter Pedals a Reliable Tool for Monitoring Cycling Power Output?

Authors:  Víctor Rodríguez-Rielves; José Ramón Lillo-Beviá; Ángel Buendía-Romero; Alejandro Martínez-Cava; Alejandro Hernández-Belmonte; Javier Courel-Ibáñez; Jesús G Pallarés
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 3.  Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Authors:  Anthony Bouillod; Georges Soto-Romero; Frederic Grappe; William Bertucci; Emmanuel Brunet; Johan Cassirame
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 3.576

4.  Determinants of Interindividual Variation in Exercise-Induced Cardiac Troponin I Levels.

Authors:  Magnus Bjørkavoll-Bergseth; Christine Bjørkvik Erevik; Øyunn Kleiven; Thijs M H Eijsvogels; Øyvind Skadberg; Vidar Frøysa; Tomasz Wiktorski; Bjørn Auestad; Thor Edvardsen; Kristin Moberg Aakre; Stein Ørn
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-08-28       Impact factor: 5.501

5.  Validity of the Favero Assioma Duo Power Pedal System for Measuring Power Output and Cadence.

Authors:  Almudena Montalvo-Pérez; Lidia B Alejo; Pedro L Valenzuela; Mario Castellanos; Jaime Gil-Cabrera; Eduardo Talavera; Alejandro Lucia; David Barranco-Gil
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 3.576

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.