Cargando…
Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review
A large number of power meters have become commercially available during the last decades to provide power output (PO) measurement. Some of these power meters were evaluated for validity in the literature. This study aimed to perform a review of the available literature on the validity of cycling po...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8749704/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35009945 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22010386 |
_version_ | 1784631293369122816 |
---|---|
author | Bouillod, Anthony Soto-Romero, Georges Grappe, Frederic Bertucci, William Brunet, Emmanuel Cassirame, Johan |
author_facet | Bouillod, Anthony Soto-Romero, Georges Grappe, Frederic Bertucci, William Brunet, Emmanuel Cassirame, Johan |
author_sort | Bouillod, Anthony |
collection | PubMed |
description | A large number of power meters have become commercially available during the last decades to provide power output (PO) measurement. Some of these power meters were evaluated for validity in the literature. This study aimed to perform a review of the available literature on the validity of cycling power meters. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar have been explored with PRISMA methodology. A total of 74 studies have been extracted for the reviewing process. Validity is a general quality of the measurement determined by the assessment of different metrological properties: Accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness. Accuracy was most often studied from the metrological property (74 studies). Reproducibility was the second most studied (40 studies) property. Finally, repeatability, sensitivity, and robustness were considerably less studied with only 7, 5, and 5 studies, respectively. The SRM power meter is the most used as a gold standard in the studies. Moreover, the number of participants was very different among them, from 0 (when using a calibration rig) to 56 participants. The PO tested was up to 1700 W, whereas the pedalling cadence ranged between 40 and 180 rpm, including submaximal and maximal exercises. Other exercise conditions were tested, such as torque, position, temperature, and vibrations. This review provides some caveats and recommendations when testing the validity of a cycling power meter, including all of the metrological properties (accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness) and some exercise conditions (PO range, sprint, pedalling cadence, torque, position, participant, temperature, vibration, and field test). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8749704 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87497042022-01-12 Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review Bouillod, Anthony Soto-Romero, Georges Grappe, Frederic Bertucci, William Brunet, Emmanuel Cassirame, Johan Sensors (Basel) Systematic Review A large number of power meters have become commercially available during the last decades to provide power output (PO) measurement. Some of these power meters were evaluated for validity in the literature. This study aimed to perform a review of the available literature on the validity of cycling power meters. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar have been explored with PRISMA methodology. A total of 74 studies have been extracted for the reviewing process. Validity is a general quality of the measurement determined by the assessment of different metrological properties: Accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness. Accuracy was most often studied from the metrological property (74 studies). Reproducibility was the second most studied (40 studies) property. Finally, repeatability, sensitivity, and robustness were considerably less studied with only 7, 5, and 5 studies, respectively. The SRM power meter is the most used as a gold standard in the studies. Moreover, the number of participants was very different among them, from 0 (when using a calibration rig) to 56 participants. The PO tested was up to 1700 W, whereas the pedalling cadence ranged between 40 and 180 rpm, including submaximal and maximal exercises. Other exercise conditions were tested, such as torque, position, temperature, and vibrations. This review provides some caveats and recommendations when testing the validity of a cycling power meter, including all of the metrological properties (accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness) and some exercise conditions (PO range, sprint, pedalling cadence, torque, position, participant, temperature, vibration, and field test). MDPI 2022-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8749704/ /pubmed/35009945 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22010386 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Bouillod, Anthony Soto-Romero, Georges Grappe, Frederic Bertucci, William Brunet, Emmanuel Cassirame, Johan Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review |
title | Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review |
title_full | Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review |
title_fullStr | Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review |
title_short | Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review |
title_sort | caveats and recommendations to assess the validity and reliability of cycling power meters: a systematic scoping review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8749704/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35009945 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22010386 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bouillodanthony caveatsandrecommendationstoassessthevalidityandreliabilityofcyclingpowermetersasystematicscopingreview AT sotoromerogeorges caveatsandrecommendationstoassessthevalidityandreliabilityofcyclingpowermetersasystematicscopingreview AT grappefrederic caveatsandrecommendationstoassessthevalidityandreliabilityofcyclingpowermetersasystematicscopingreview AT bertucciwilliam caveatsandrecommendationstoassessthevalidityandreliabilityofcyclingpowermetersasystematicscopingreview AT brunetemmanuel caveatsandrecommendationstoassessthevalidityandreliabilityofcyclingpowermetersasystematicscopingreview AT cassiramejohan caveatsandrecommendationstoassessthevalidityandreliabilityofcyclingpowermetersasystematicscopingreview |