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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bouillod, Anthony, Soto-Romero, Georges, Grappe, Frederic, Bertucci, William, Brunet, Emmanuel, Cassirame, Johan
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