Ventilatory Thresholds Differences According to Aerobic Fitness Level in 1450 Males and 241 Females on Cycle-Ergometer: A Cross-Sectional Study.

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.

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.

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Prehypertension in young physically active adults: early vascular alterations and implications for exercise-intensity prescription.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026
   Article
2. Comparison of adaptations to four weeks of continuous hypoxic training between healthy men with lower and higher initial aerobic fitness.Frontiers in physiology · 2026
   Article
3. Study on the effects of 4 × 4 min high-intensity interval training frequency on cardiorespiratory function, metabolic indices, and exercise performance in male university students.Frontiers in physiology · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as