ArticlePhysical activity and nutrition2025
Validation of the 5-minute running test as a physiological indicator of aerobic fitness.
Article in Physical activity and nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the validity of the 5-minute running test (5RFT) as a field-based assessment of aerobic fitness by examining its correlation with maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) measured using the Bruce protocol.
methodsTwenty-one healthy male participants majoring in physical education at S University completed both the 5RFT and a laboratory-based VO2max test using the Bruce protocol. During the 5RFT, oxygen consumption was measured using a portable metabolic gas analyzer (K5, COSMED, Italy). VO2max values from the 5RFT were compared with laboratory-based measurements to determine validity.
resultsThe 5RFT showed a strong positive correlation with VO2max measured using the Bruce protocol (r = 0.675, p < 0.05). Additionally, a significant correlation was observed between the 5-minute oxygen consumption measured by K5 and the 5RFT (r = 0.621, p < 0.01). However, mean difference analysis indicated that the 5RFT estimation values were higher than both the K5 and Bruce protocol results (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe findings suggest that the 5-minute running test, in combination with portable metabolic gas analysis, is a valid and practical method for estimating aerobic fitness in field settings. While the 5RFT may overestimate VO2max values compared to laboratory testing, its strong correlations support its applicability as a convenient alternative assessment tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.