ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2026
DFAα1 as an intensity-sensitive biomarker for exercise prescription: a prospective cross-sectional study in healthy young adults.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile heart rate variability (HRV) offers a non-invasive alternative for ventilatory thresholds (VTs) estimation, its conventional linear parameters (e.g., RMSSD) exhibit a "floor effect" limiting utility. DFAα1 is a promising non-linear HRV parameter, reflecting the complex pattern of autonomic regulation. This study evaluated DFAα1 for threshold estimation, intensity monitoring, and recovery assessment.
methods27 healthy adults underwent an incremental cycle ergometer test. VTs were determined via standard criteria, while HRV thresholds (HRVTs) were determined using multiple parameters. A subset (n = 19) then performed low to severe intensity exercise tests (E1-E4) to validate HRV sensitivity and dynamic responses.
resultsFor HRVT1 vs. VT1: DFAα1-derived HRVT1 exhibited the highest ICC (> 0.60) among all parameters but with a systematic bias; for HRVT2 vs. VT2: DFAα1-derived HRVT2 exhibited moderate-to-high ICC (> 0.60) and RMSSD-derived achieved the highest ICC (0.88-0.95). During E1-E4, DFAα1 and the natural log of RMSSD (LnRMSSD) both decreased during exercise and increased during recovery. During exercise, DFAα1 in E1 and E2 exceeded in E3 and E4, while LnRMSSD was higher in E1 than in E2-E4 (all P < 0.05). During recovery in E2-E4, DFAα1 exceeded baseline, and this rebound was delayed with intensity, while LnRMSSD was lower than baseline with a downward trend.
conclusionsDFAα1 showed potential for estimating both VTs, retained sensitivity across intensity domains, and showed recovery dynamics proportional to prior intensity. Despite individual variability suggesting use for broad zoning rather than precise estimation, DFAα1 serves as an intensity-sensitive biomarker for individualized exercise prescription.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42053805What 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.