A comparison of field methods to assess cardiorespiratory fitness among neophyte exercisers

Karen D'Alonzo, Kate Marbach, Linda Vincent

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is evidence to suggest that aerobic fitness levels among adults have declined markedly over the past 2 to 3 decades. Submaximal field measures of aerobic fitness, such as step tests, may now be seen as aversive by contemporary neophyte exercisers. In this study, a single-factor within-subjects (repeated measures) factorial design was used to compare three field measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among sedentary women: (a) the Queen's College step test (QCST), (b) the Rockport 1-mile walk (RW), and (c) a nonexercise estimation of VO 2 max (NE). The sample consisted of 31 racially and ethnically diverse female college students (mean age of 24.8 years). No significant within-subjects differences were found in the three measures of V0 2 max (F = 1.89, p =.17) among Black, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, or Asian women, but relative perceived exertion scores were significantly higher for the QCST than for the RW (t = 9.79, p <.001) for all groups. The mean calculated VO 2 max for the QCST was 35.90 ml/kg/min for the subset of women ages 18 to 25 and 31.85 for those ages 26 to 46. These values represent a "poor" to "below average" score for aerobic capacity among women in both age groups. Data from this preliminary study suggest that both the RW test and the NE test are comparable to the QCST as valid and reliable field measures of aerobic fitness and appear to be good alternatives to step testing among sedentary individuals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7-14
Number of pages8
JournalBiological Research for Nursing
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 31 2006

Fingerprint

Exercise Test
Hispanic Americans
Age Groups
Cardiorespiratory Fitness
Students

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Research and Theory

Keywords

  • Aerobic fitness
  • Exercise testing
  • Step tests
  • Within-subjects factorial design

Cite this

D'Alonzo, Karen ; Marbach, Kate ; Vincent, Linda. / A comparison of field methods to assess cardiorespiratory fitness among neophyte exercisers. In: Biological Research for Nursing. 2006 ; Vol. 8, No. 1. pp. 7-14.
@article{4517a1744a6c45e395840a8ca8e9e493,
title = "A comparison of field methods to assess cardiorespiratory fitness among neophyte exercisers",
abstract = "There is evidence to suggest that aerobic fitness levels among adults have declined markedly over the past 2 to 3 decades. Submaximal field measures of aerobic fitness, such as step tests, may now be seen as aversive by contemporary neophyte exercisers. In this study, a single-factor within-subjects (repeated measures) factorial design was used to compare three field measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among sedentary women: (a) the Queen's College step test (QCST), (b) the Rockport 1-mile walk (RW), and (c) a nonexercise estimation of VO 2 max (NE). The sample consisted of 31 racially and ethnically diverse female college students (mean age of 24.8 years). No significant within-subjects differences were found in the three measures of V0 2 max (F = 1.89, p =.17) among Black, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, or Asian women, but relative perceived exertion scores were significantly higher for the QCST than for the RW (t = 9.79, p <.001) for all groups. The mean calculated VO 2 max for the QCST was 35.90 ml/kg/min for the subset of women ages 18 to 25 and 31.85 for those ages 26 to 46. These values represent a {"}poor{"} to {"}below average{"} score for aerobic capacity among women in both age groups. Data from this preliminary study suggest that both the RW test and the NE test are comparable to the QCST as valid and reliable field measures of aerobic fitness and appear to be good alternatives to step testing among sedentary individuals.",
keywords = "Aerobic fitness, Exercise testing, Step tests, Within-subjects factorial design",
author = "Karen D'Alonzo and Kate Marbach and Linda Vincent",
year = "2006",
month = "8",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1177/1099800406287864",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "7--14",
journal = "Biological Research for Nursing",
issn = "1099-8004",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

A comparison of field methods to assess cardiorespiratory fitness among neophyte exercisers. / D'Alonzo, Karen; Marbach, Kate; Vincent, Linda.

In: Biological Research for Nursing, Vol. 8, No. 1, 31.08.2006, p. 7-14.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of field methods to assess cardiorespiratory fitness among neophyte exercisers

AU - D'Alonzo, Karen

AU - Marbach, Kate

AU - Vincent, Linda

PY - 2006/8/31

Y1 - 2006/8/31

N2 - There is evidence to suggest that aerobic fitness levels among adults have declined markedly over the past 2 to 3 decades. Submaximal field measures of aerobic fitness, such as step tests, may now be seen as aversive by contemporary neophyte exercisers. In this study, a single-factor within-subjects (repeated measures) factorial design was used to compare three field measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among sedentary women: (a) the Queen's College step test (QCST), (b) the Rockport 1-mile walk (RW), and (c) a nonexercise estimation of VO 2 max (NE). The sample consisted of 31 racially and ethnically diverse female college students (mean age of 24.8 years). No significant within-subjects differences were found in the three measures of V0 2 max (F = 1.89, p =.17) among Black, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, or Asian women, but relative perceived exertion scores were significantly higher for the QCST than for the RW (t = 9.79, p <.001) for all groups. The mean calculated VO 2 max for the QCST was 35.90 ml/kg/min for the subset of women ages 18 to 25 and 31.85 for those ages 26 to 46. These values represent a "poor" to "below average" score for aerobic capacity among women in both age groups. Data from this preliminary study suggest that both the RW test and the NE test are comparable to the QCST as valid and reliable field measures of aerobic fitness and appear to be good alternatives to step testing among sedentary individuals.

AB - There is evidence to suggest that aerobic fitness levels among adults have declined markedly over the past 2 to 3 decades. Submaximal field measures of aerobic fitness, such as step tests, may now be seen as aversive by contemporary neophyte exercisers. In this study, a single-factor within-subjects (repeated measures) factorial design was used to compare three field measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among sedentary women: (a) the Queen's College step test (QCST), (b) the Rockport 1-mile walk (RW), and (c) a nonexercise estimation of VO 2 max (NE). The sample consisted of 31 racially and ethnically diverse female college students (mean age of 24.8 years). No significant within-subjects differences were found in the three measures of V0 2 max (F = 1.89, p =.17) among Black, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, or Asian women, but relative perceived exertion scores were significantly higher for the QCST than for the RW (t = 9.79, p <.001) for all groups. The mean calculated VO 2 max for the QCST was 35.90 ml/kg/min for the subset of women ages 18 to 25 and 31.85 for those ages 26 to 46. These values represent a "poor" to "below average" score for aerobic capacity among women in both age groups. Data from this preliminary study suggest that both the RW test and the NE test are comparable to the QCST as valid and reliable field measures of aerobic fitness and appear to be good alternatives to step testing among sedentary individuals.

KW - Aerobic fitness

KW - Exercise testing

KW - Step tests

KW - Within-subjects factorial design

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33747191191&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33747191191&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1099800406287864

DO - 10.1177/1099800406287864

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 7

EP - 14

JO - Biological Research for Nursing

JF - Biological Research for Nursing

SN - 1099-8004

IS - 1

ER -