Cargando…

The Prediction of Running Velocity during the 30–15 Intermittent Fitness Test Using Accelerometry-Derived Metrics and Physiological Parameters: A Machine Learning Approach

Measuring exercise variables is one of the most important points to consider to maximize physiological adaptations. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a useful method to improve both cardiovascular and neuromuscular performance. The 30–15(IFT) is a field test reflecting the effort elicited b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Di Credico, Andrea, Perpetuini, David, Chiacchiaretta, Piero, Cardone, Daniela, Filippini, Chiara, Gaggi, Giulia, Merla, Arcangelo, Ghinassi, Barbara, Di Baldassarre, Angela, Izzicupo, Pascal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8535824/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34682594
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182010854
Descripción
Sumario:Measuring exercise variables is one of the most important points to consider to maximize physiological adaptations. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a useful method to improve both cardiovascular and neuromuscular performance. The 30–15(IFT) is a field test reflecting the effort elicited by HIIT, and the final velocity reached in the test is used to set the intensity of HIIT during the training session. In order to have a valid measure of the velocity during training, devices such as GPS can be used. However, in several situations (e.g., indoor setting), such devices do not provide reliable measures. The aim of the study was to predict exact running velocity during the 30–15(IFT) using accelerometry-derived metrics (i.e., Player Load and Average Net Force) and heart rate (HR) through a machine learning (ML) approach (i.e., Support Vector Machine) with a leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. The SVM approach showed the highest performance to predict running velocity (r = 0.91) when compared to univariate approaches using PL (r = 0.62), AvNetForce (r = 0.73) and HR only (r = 0.87). In conclusion, the presented multivariate ML approach is able to predict running velocity better than univariate ones, and the model is generalizable across subjects.