Evidence mapPaperPMID 28058696Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2017

Size Exponents for Scaling Maximal Oxygen Uptake in Over 6500 Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Lorenzo Lolli, Alan M Batterham, Kathryn L Weston, Greg Atkinson

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comment on "Predicting VOSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Quantifying Running Economy in Amateur Runners: Evaluating VOJournal of sports science & medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Predicting VOSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Interactive effects of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on metabolic rate.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lorenzo LolliHealth and Social Care Institute, School of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Constantine Building, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BA, UK. L.Lolli@tees.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8670-3361
Alan M BatterhamHealth and Social Care Institute, School of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Constantine Building, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BA, UK.
Kathryn L WestonHealth and Social Care Institute, School of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Constantine Building, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BA, UK.
Greg AtkinsonHealth and Social Care Institute, School of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Constantine Building, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BA, UK.
Teesside University · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]

objectiveThe objective of this systematic review was to provide a quantitative synthesis of reported static allometric exponents used for scaling [Formula: see text]

methodsEight electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science) were searched for relevant studies published up to January 2016. Search terms included 'oxygen uptake', 'cardiorespiratory fitness', '[Formula: see text]

resultsThirty-six studies, involving 6514 participants, met the eligibility criteria. Whole body mass and fat-free mass were used as the scaling denominator in 27 and 15 studies, respectively. The pooled allometric exponent (95% Cls) was found to be 0.70 (0.64 to 0.76) for whole body mass and 0.90 (0.83 to 0.96) for fat-free mass. The between-study heterogeneity was greater for whole body mass (τ = ±0.15) than for fat-free mass (τ = ±0.11). Participant sex explained 30% of the between-study variability in the whole body mass exponent, but the influence on the fat-free mass exponent was trivial. The whole body mass exponent of 0.52 (0.40 to 0.64) for females was substantially lower than the 0.76 (0.70 to 0.83) for males, whereas the fat-free mass exponent was similar for both sexes. The effects of all other moderators were trivial. The 95% PI for fat-free mass ranged from 0.68 to 1.12. The estimated probability of a true fat-free mass exponent in a future study being greater than [Formula: see text] power scaling is 0.98 (very likely) and 0.92 (likely), respectively.

conclusionsIn this quantitative synthesis of published studies involving over 6500 humans, the whole body mass exponent was found to be spuriously low and prone to substantial heterogeneity. We conclude that the scaling of [Formula: see text]

Indexed as

Body CompositionBody SizeFemaleHumansMaleOxygenOxygen ConsumptionOxygen

Identifiers

PMID28058696
OpenAlexW2569301413

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.