Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Response to the Comment by Armstrong and Welsman on ‘Developing a New Curvilinear Allometric Model to Improve the Fit and Validity of the 20-m Shuttle Run Test as a Predictor of Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Adults and Youth’

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
Sports Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The Original Research Article was published on 24 September 2020

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Armstrong N, Welsman J. Comment on ‘Developing a new curvilinear allometric model to improve the fit and validity of the 20-m shuttle run test as a predictor of cardiorespiratory fitness in adults and youth’. Sports Med. 2021;. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01462-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nevill AM, Ramsbottom R, Sandercock G, Bocachica-Gonzalez CE, Ramirez-Velez R, Tomkinson G. Developing a new curvilinear allometric model to improve the fit and validity of the 20-m shuttle run test as a predictor of cardiorespiratory fitness in adults and youth. Sports Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01346-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Blair SN, Kohl HW 3rd, Paffenbarger RS Jr, Clark DG, Cooper KH, Gibbons LW. Physical fitness and all-cause mortality: a prospective study of healthy men and women. JAMA. 1989;262:2395–401.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ross R, Blair SN, Arena R, et al. Importance of assessing cardiorespiratory fitness in clinical practice: a case for fitness as a clinical vital sign. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;134:e653–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Welsman J, Armstrong N. The 20 m shuttle run is not a valid test of cardiorespiratory fitness in boys aged 11–14 years. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2019;5:e000627. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2019-000627.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Nes BM, Janszky I, Vatten LJ, et al. Estimating VO2peak from a non-exercise prediction model: the HUNT study, Norway. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:2024–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Myers J, Kaminsky LA, Lima R, et al. A reference equation for normal standards for VO2 max: analysis from the Fitness Registry and the Importance of Exercise National Database (FRIEND Registry). ProgCardiovasc Dis. 2017;60:21–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. de Menezes-Junior FJ, de Jesus ÍC, Mota J, et al. Validation of equations to estimate the peak oxygen uptake in adolescents from 20 metres shuttle run test. J Sports Sci. 2020;38(22):2588–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nevill AM, Cooke CB. The Dangers of Estimating VO2max Using Linear, Nonexercise Prediction Models. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017;49(5):1036–42. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Nevill AM, Myers J, Kaminsky LA, Arena R. Improving reference equations for cardiorespiratory fitness using multiplicative allometric rather than additive linear models: data from the Fitness Registry and the Importance of Exercise National Database Registry. ProgCardiovasc Dis. 2019;62:515–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcad.2019.11.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nevill AM, Myers J, Kaminsky LA, Arena R. Comments on “validation of equations to estimate the peak oxygen uptake in adolescents from 20 metres shuttle run test.” J Sports Sci. 2020;00(00):1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nevill AM, et al. Predicting cardiorespiratory fitness using the 20-m shuttle run test: new insights using nonlinear allometry. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0000000000002637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Health and Wellbeing, University of Wolverhampton, Walsall Campus, Walsall, UK

    Alan M. Nevill

  2. Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK

    Roger Ramsbottom

  3. School Sport, Rehabilitation and Exercise Science, University of Essex, Colchester, UK

    Gavin Sandercock

  4. La Victoria, Institución Educativa Distrital, Secretaria de Educación del Distrito, Bogotá, Colombia

    Carlos Eduardo Bocachica-González

  5. Department of Health Sciences, Public University of Navarra, Navarrabiomed-IdiSNA, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra (CHN), 31008, Pamplona, Spain

    Robinson Ramírez-Vélez

  6. Department of Education, Health and Behavior Studies, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, USA

    Grant Tomkinson

  7. Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Grant Tomkinson

Authors
  1. Alan M. Nevill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roger Ramsbottom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gavin Sandercock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carlos Eduardo Bocachica-González
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robinson Ramírez-Vélez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Grant Tomkinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alan M. Nevill.

Ethics declarations

Funding

Funding was not required to write the letter.

Conflict of interest/Competing interests

There were no conflict of interests.

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Authors’ contributions

All authors helped write, edit and revise the letter.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

This is a reply to a letter, which is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01462-5.

The letter and this reply refer to the article available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01346-0.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nevill, A.M., Ramsbottom, R., Sandercock, G. et al. Response to the Comment by Armstrong and Welsman on ‘Developing a New Curvilinear Allometric Model to Improve the Fit and Validity of the 20-m Shuttle Run Test as a Predictor of Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Adults and Youth’. Sports Med 51, 1595–1597 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01464-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01464-3

Search

Navigation