scholarly journals Caveats and Recommendations to Assess the Validity and Reliability of Cycling Power Meters: A Systematic Scoping Review

Sensors ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 386
Author(s):  
Anthony Bouillod ◽  
Georges Soto-Romero ◽  
Frederic Grappe ◽  
William Bertucci ◽  
Emmanuel Brunet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Field Test ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
Metrological Property ◽  
General Quality

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).

scholarly journals Are the Assioma Favero Power Meter Pedals a Reliable Tool for Monitoring Cycling Power Output?

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 2789
Author(s):  
Víctor Rodríguez-Rielves ◽  
José Ramón Lillo-Beviá ◽  
Ángel Buendía-Romero ◽  
Alejandro Martínez-Cava ◽  
Alejandro Hernández-Belmonte ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Cycle Ergometer ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Direct Drive ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
High Workload ◽  
Vibration Stress ◽  
40 Hz

This study aimed to examine the validity and reliability of the recently developed Assioma Favero pedals under laboratory cycling conditions. In total, 12 well-trained male cyclists and triathletes (VO2max = 65.7 ± 8.7 mL·kg−1·min−1) completed five cycling tests including graded exercises tests (GXT) at different cadences (70–100 revolutions per minute, rpm), workloads (100–650 Watts, W), pedaling positions (seated and standing), vibration stress (20–40 Hz), and an 8-s maximal sprint. Tests were completed using a calibrated direct drive indoor trainer for the standing, seated, and vibration GXTs, and a friction belt cycle ergometer for the high-workload step protocol. Power output (PO) and cadence were collected from three different brand, new pedal units against the gold-standard SRM crankset. The three units of the Assioma Favero exhibited very high within-test reliability and an extremely high agreement between 100 and 250 W, compared to the gold standard (Standard Error of Measurement, SEM from 2.3–6.4 W). Greater PO produced a significant underestimating trend (p < 0.05, Effect size, ES ≥ 0.22), with pedals showing systematically lower PO than SRM (1–3%) but producing low bias for all GXT tests and conditions (1.5–7.4 W). Furthermore, vibrations ≥ 30 Hz significantly increased the differences up to 4% (p < 0.05, ES ≥ 0.24), whereas peak and mean PO differed importantly between devices during the sprints (p < 0.03, ES ≥ 0.39). These results demonstrate that the Assioma Favero power meter pedals provide trustworthy PO readings from 100 to 650 W, in either seated or standing positions, with vibrations between 20 and 40 Hz at cadences of 70, 85, and 100 rpm, or even at a free chosen cadence.

scholarly journals Mechanical Power in Endurance Running: A Scoping Review on Sensors for Power Output Estimation during Running

Sensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (22) ◽  
pp. 6482
Author(s):  
Diego Jaén-Carrillo ◽  
Luis E. Roche-Seruendo ◽  
Antonio Cartón-Llorente ◽  
Rodrigo Ramírez-Campillo ◽  
Felipe García-Pinillos
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Wearable Sensors ◽  
Mechanical Power ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Endurance Running ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
Key Indicator ◽  
Kinematics Parameters

Mechanical power may act as a key indicator for physiological and mechanical changes during running. In this scoping review, we examine the current evidences about the use of power output (PW) during endurance running and the different commercially available wearable sensors to assess PW. The Boolean phrases endurance OR submaximal NOT sprint AND running OR runner AND power OR power meter, were searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS. Nineteen studies were finally selected for analysis. The current evidence about critical power and both power-time and power-duration relationships in running allow to provide coaches and practitioners a new promising setting for PW quantification with the use of wearable sensors. Some studies have assessed the validity and reliability of different available wearables for both kinematics parameters and PW when running but running power meters need further research before a definitive conclusion regarding its validity and reliability.

Psychometric Properties of Postpartum Quality of Life Questionnaires: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahereh Mokhtarian-Gilani ◽  
Nourossadat kariman ◽  
Hamid Sharif-Nia ◽  
Mahbobeh Ahmadi-Doulabi ◽  
Malihe Nasiri
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Quality Of Life Questionnaires ◽  
General Quality

Abstract Background:The postpartum quality of life refers to women's understanding of their standing in the postpartum crisis that differs depending on their health status, social support, cultural status and values, attitudes, goals and standards. The present systematic review will identify, describe, and critically assess the psychometric properties of postpartum quality of life questionnaires.Methods/Design:A systematic review will be conducted in databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from January 2000 to January 2020. The psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of the instruments used in the primary studies will be assessed, and the selection, methodological quality assessment and data extraction processes of the studies will be independently assessed by two reviewers with expertise in conducting systematic reviews, so as to minimize potential personal bias. Eligible resources are selected after any lack of consensus is put to debate.The risk of bias is assessed using the COSMIN RISK of Bias checklist, and to evaluate the quality of the studies, the protocol is written based on the PRISMA-P1 standards. The results of the studies will be judged based on good measurement properties, and the results of all the studies are qualitatively summarized to produce a reference for the general quality of the results. The general quality of the evidence will be determined using a modified GRADE method.Discussion:This study assessed the psychometric properties of questionnaires used for assessing postpartum quality of life and its results can be used to identify the most appropriate tool for health applications in measuring postpartum quality of life. Systematic review registration: reference number in PROSPRO CRD42020166301

scholarly journals Instruments used to assess quality of life of older adults in African countries: a scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Priscilla Y. A. Attafuah ◽  
Irma H. J. Everink ◽  
Ruud J. G. Halfens ◽  
Christa Lohrmann ◽  
Aaron Abuosi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Cultural Sensitivity ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Time Investment ◽  
New Instrument

Abstract Background Over 60% of the population in sub-Saharan Africa, live in informal settlements (slums) with little or no resources. To be prepared to meet the needs of older people living in slums, it is necessary to know more about their quality of life (QoL). The objective of this review is to identify instruments, which can be used by researchers to assess the QoL of older adults living in African countries, especially those dwelling in slums. Methods A scoping review was performed using the databases Scopus, PubMed, and ISI Web of Science to retrieve studies published from January 2008 – September 2020. Studies were included if they reported generic QoL instruments, focused on adults with a mean age ≥ 50 and were conducted in African countries. Results In total, 18 studies were included using 7 unique instruments to measure QoL (EUROHIS-QOL-8, SWLS, WHOQOL-OLD, the WHOQOL-BREF, SF-36, SF-12 and RAND-38). All instruments could be interviewer-administered and had 5–36 items. However, little is known about their psychometric properties (validity and reliability), time-investment and cultural sensitivity of the domains included in the instruments. Conclusions Even though this review retrieved instruments used to assess QoL of older adults in African countries, there is a need for further research on adjustment and validation of currently existing QoL instruments. In addition, the development and validation of a new instrument which can be used in (illiterate) older populations, living in slums in Africa should be considered.

scholarly journals The Validity and Reliability of a Tire Pressure-Based Power Meter for Indoor Cycling

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (18) ◽  
pp. 6117
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Fiolo ◽  
Hai-Ying Lu ◽  
Chia-Hsiang Chen ◽  
Philip X. Fuchs ◽  
Wei-Han Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Linear Regression ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Statistical Difference ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Tire Pressure ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
Perfect Correlation ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
Post Hoc

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of a tire pressure sensor (TPS) cycling power meter against a gold standard (SRM) during indoor cycling. Twelve recreationally active participants completed eight trials of 90 s of cycling at different pedaling and gearing combinations on an indoor hybrid roller. Power output (PO) was simultaneously calculated via TPS and SRM. The analysis compared the paired 1 s PO and 1 min average PO per trial between devices. Agreement was assessed by correlation, linear regression, inferential statistics, effect size, and Bland–Altman LoA. Reliability was assessed by ICC and CV comparison. TPS showed near-perfect correlation with SRM in 1 s (rs = 0.97, p < 0.001) and 1-min data (rs = 0.99, p < 0.001). Differences in paired 1 s data were statistically significant (p = 0.04), but of a trivial magnitude (d = 0.05). There was no significant main effect for device (F(1,9) = 0.05, p = 0.83, ηp2 = 0.97) in 1 min data and no statistical differences between devices by trial in post hoc analysis (p < 0.01–0.98; d < 0.01–0.93). Bias and LoA were −0.21 ± 16.77 W for the 1 min data. Mean TPS bias ranged from 3.37% to 7.81% of the measured SRM mean PO per trial. Linear regression SEE was 7.55 W for 1 min TPS prediction of SRM. ICC3,1 across trials was 0.96. No statistical difference (p = 0.09–0.11) in TPS CV (3.6–5.0%) and SRM CV (4.3–4.7%). The TPS is a valid and reliable power meter for estimating average indoor PO for time periods equal to or greater than 1 min and may have acceptable sensitivity to detect changes under less stringent criteria (±5%).

Validity and Reliability of the Look Keo Power Pedal System for Measuring Power Output During Incremental and Repeated Sprint Cycling

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Andy Sparks ◽  
Benjamin Dove ◽  
Craig A. Bridge ◽  
Adrian W. Midgley ◽  
Lars R. McNaughton
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Incremental Test ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
Repeated Sprint ◽  
Typical Error ◽  
Sprint Cycling ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
The Look

Power meters have traditionally been integrated into the crank set, but several manufacturers have designed new systems located elsewhere on the bike, such as inside the pedals.Purpose:This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of the Keo power pedals during several laboratory cycling tasks.Methods:Ten active male participants (mean ± SD age 34.0 ± 10.6 y, height 1.77 ± 0.04 m, body mass 76.5 ± 10.7 kg) familiar with laboratory cycling protocols completed this study. Each participant was required to complete 2 laboratory cycling trials on an SRM ergometer (SRM, Germany) that was also fitted with the Keo power pedals (Look, France). The trials consisted of an incremental test to exhaustion followed by 10 min rest and then three 10-s sprint tests separated by 3 min of cycling at 100 W.Results:Over power ranges of 75 to 1147 W, the Keo power-pedal system produced typical error values of 0.40, 0.21, and 0.21 for the incremental, sprint, and combined trials, respectively, compared with the SRM. Mean differences of 21.0 and 18.6 W were observed between trials 1 and 2 with the Keo system in the incremental and combined protocols, respectively. In contrast, the SRM produced differences of 1.3 and 0.6 W for the same protocols.Conclusions:The power data from the Keo power pedals should be treated with some caution given the presence of mean differences between them and the SRM. Furthermore, this is exacerbated by poorer reliability than that of the SRM power meter.

scholarly journals Instrumen Kepuasan Pasien Terhadap Pelayanan Keperawatan : Literature Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 87
Author(s):  
Nina Nisrina Badrin ◽  
Rini Rachmawaty ◽  
Kusrini Kadar
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Instrument Development ◽  
Nursing Care ◽  
Hospital Environment ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Nursing Services ◽  
Psychometric Validity

<p><em>Patient satisfaction is one of indicator to assess the quality of health services. Measurement of patient satisfaction with nursing services is needed as an evaluation material for nursing management to ensure and improve the quality of nursing services. Several instruments of patient satisfaction with nursing services have been developed. The purpose of this Literature Review is to identify instruments of patient satisfaction with nursing services. This literature review examines the results of development and psychometric testing research of patient satisfaction instruments through article search in PubMed and Google scholar databases with keywords : patient satisfaction, nursing care, instrument, development, tools, psychometric, validity and reliability. We reviewed 20 articles. There are 7 instruments for assessing patient satisfaction with nursing services, namely the questionnaire SERVQUAL, HCAHPS, RPSS, GNCS, NSNS, PSNCQQ and PPHEN. Patient satisfaction instruments consist of several dimensions including individual assessment, communication, staff response, technical competence, interpersonal competence, health education, facilities, hospital environment, comfort, information on return, collaboration and coordination when patients are discharged from the hospital. Based on this literature review it can be concluded that there are several instruments and dimensions that can be used to assess patient satisfaction. But, it is necessary the development of patient satisfaction instruments by involving the perspective of the service provider and incorporating the dimensions of caring as the essence of nursing services.</em></p><p> </p><p>Kepuasan pasien merupakan salah satu indikator untuk menilai kualitas pelayanan kesehatan. Pengukuran  kepuasan pasien terhadap pelayanan keperawatan diperlukan sebagai bahan evaluasi bagi manajemen keperawatan untuk menjamin dan meningkatkan kualitas pelayanan keperawatan. Beberapa instrumen kepuasan pasien terhadap pelayanan keperawatan telah dikembangkan. Tujuan Literature Review ini untuk mengidentifikasi instrumen kepuasan pasien terhadap pelayanan keperawatan. Literature review ini menelaah hasil penelitian pengembangan dan uji psikometrik instrumen kepuasan pasien melalui pencarian artikel di database PubMed dan Google scholar dengan kata kunci : patient satisfaction, nursing care, instrument, development, tool, psychometric, validity dan reliability. Kami melakukan review terhadap 20 artikel. Ada 7 instrumen penilaian kepuasan pasien terhadap pelayanan keperawatan yaitu kuesioner SERVQUAL, HCAHPS, RPSS, GNCS, NSNS, PSNCQQ dan PPHEN. Instrumen kepuasan pasien terdiri dari beberapa dimensi termasuk penilaian individu, komunikasi, tanggapan staf, kompetensi teknis, kompetensi interpersonal, pendidikan kesehatan, fasilitas, lingkungan rumah sakit, kenyamanan, informasi kepulangan, kolaborasi dan koordinasi ketika pasien keluar dari rumah sakit. Berdasarkan literature review ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa untuk menilai kepuasan pasien terhadap terdapat beberapa instrumen dan dimensi yang dapat digunakan. Namun perlu pengembangan instrumen kepuasan pasien dengan melibatkan perspektif dari pemberi pelayanan dan memasukkan dimensi caring sebagai esensi dari pelayanan keperawatan.</p>

Validity and Reliability of the Garmin Vector Power Meter in Laboratory and Field Cycling

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (06) ◽  
pp. 439-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred Nimmerichter ◽  
Lukas Schnitzer ◽  
Bernhard Prinz ◽  
Dieter Simon ◽  
Klaus Wirth
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Peak Power ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Good Reliability ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
Typical Error ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sprint Cycling ◽  
S Peak

AbstractTo assess the validity and reliability of the Garmin Vector against the SRM power meter, 6 cyclists completed 3 continuous trials at power outputs from 100–300 W at 50–90 rev·min−1 and a 5-min time trial in laboratory and field conditions. In field conditions only, a 30-s sprint was performed. Data were compared with paired samples t-tests, with the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and the typical error. Reliability was calculated as the coefficient of variation (CV). There was no significant difference between the devices in power output in laboratory (p=0.245) and field conditions (p=0.312). 1-s peak power was significantly different between the devices (p=0.043). The LoA were ~1.0±5.0 W and ~0.5±0.5 rev·min−1 in both conditions. The LoA during the 30-s sprint was 6.3±38.9 W and for 1-s peak power it was 18.8±17.1 W. The typical error for power output was 2.9%, while during sprint cycling it was 7.4% for 30-s and 2.7% for 1-s peak power. For cadence, the typical error was below 1.0%. The mean CVs were ~1.0% and ~3.0% for the SRM and Garmin, respectively. These findings suggest, that the Garmin Vector is a valid alternative for training. However, during sprint cycling there is lower agreement with the SRM power meter. Both devices provide good reliability (CV<3.0%).

scholarly journals Validity and reproducibility of commercial cycling power meters in hot and cold environmental temperatures

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-39
Author(s):  
Robert Shute ◽  
Roksana Zak ◽  
Dustin Slivka
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Room Temperature ◽  
Environmental Temperature ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Improve Performance ◽  
Training Tool ◽  
Power Meter ◽  
Temperature Environment ◽  
Different Temperatures ◽  
Environmental Temperatures

Power meters are a training tool used to help cyclists improve performance by objectively monitoring intensity.  Some power meters are well established and validated, whereas others are relatively new.  Most power meters have been tested for validity and reliability in laboratory and field settings of similar conditions; however, the reproducibility of these power meters across different temperatures has not been established. To examine the potential differences of the CompuTrainer, PowerTap, Stages, and Vector power meters in hot and cold compared to a room temperature environment. Recreationally trained male (n=7) and female (n=3) participants each completed three incremental cycling trials in hot (33°C), cold (7°C), or room temperature (RT, 20°C) conditions.  The power meters were placed on a standard road bicycle and power output was logged and recorded. The CompuTrainer was higher in the room temperature trial compared to the cold and the hot, but not between the hot and cold trial.  The PowerTap was not different in RT and cold, but was lower in hot compared to RT and compared to cold.  The Stages was not different between RT and cold, but was lower in the hot compared to RT and compared to cold.  The Vector was not different between RT and cold but was lower in the hot compared to RT and compared to cold.  These data indicate that environmental temperature may affect the reproducibility of power meters.  It is important to recognize the potential differences between temperatures when choosing a power meter.

scholarly journals Instruments for assessing quality of life among older adults in African countries: a scoping review

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
PRISCILLA Yeye Adumoah ATTAFUAH ◽  
Irma HJ Everink ◽  
Ruud JG Halfens ◽  
Christa Lohrmann ◽  
Aaron Abuosi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Cultural Sensitivity ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Time Investment ◽  
New Instrument

Abstract Background Over 60% of the population in sub-Saharan Africa lives in informal settlements (slums) with little or no resources. To be prepared to meet the needs of older people living in slums, it is necessary to know more about their quality of life (QoL). The objective of this review is to identify instruments, which can be used by researchers to assess the QoL of older adults living in African countries, especially those dwelling in slums.Methods A scoping review was performed using the databases Scopus, PubMed, and ISI Web of Science to retrieve studies published between January 2008 – February 2019. Studies were included if they reported generic QoL instruments, focused on adults with a mean age ≥50 and were conducted in African countries.Results In total, 22 studies were included using 14 unique instruments to measure QoL (WHOQOL, SWLS, WHOQOL-OLD, the WHOQOL-BREF, SF-36, SF-12, RAND 36, WHO-SAGE-INDEPTH, CASP-19, CASP-12, the EQ-5D+C, EQ-6D, CAF and the adapted AMS). Almost all instruments could be interviewer-administered and had the possibility for content modification to better suit the research setting. However, little is known about their psychometric properties (validity and reliability), time-investment and cultural sensitivity of the domains included in the instruments.Conclusions Even though this review retrieved instruments used to assess QoL of older adults in African countries, there is a need for further research on adjustment and validation of currently existing QoL instruments. In addition, the development and validation of a new instrument which can be used in (illiterate) older populations, living in slums in Africa should be considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document