171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35804037)
1. Comparison of physiological responses of running on a nonmotorized and conventional motor-propelled treadmill at similar intensities.
Sousa FAB; Manchado-Gobatto FB; de A Rodrigues N; de Araujo GG; Gobatto CA
Sci Rep; 2022 Jul; 12(1):11626. PubMed ID: 35804037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Five-Kilometer Time Trial Reliability of a Nonmotorized Treadmill and Comparison of Physiological and Perceptual Responses vs. a Motorized Treadmill.
Waldman HS; Heatherly AJ; Waddell AF; Krings BM; OʼNeal EK
J Strength Cond Res; 2018 May; 32(5):1455-1461. PubMed ID: 28542090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Training status affects between-protocols differences in the assessment of maximal aerobic velocity.
Riboli A; Rampichini S; Cè E; Limonta E; Borrelli M; Coratella G; Esposito F
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2021 Nov; 121(11):3083-3093. PubMed ID: 34319445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Incremental and decremental cardiopulmonary exercise testing protocols produce similar maximum oxygen uptake in athletes.
de Sousa NMF; Bertucci DR; de Sant'Ana GM; Padua PLRA; da Rosa DM
Sci Rep; 2021 Jun; 11(1):13118. PubMed ID: 34162915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak Performance on a Motorized vs. a Nonmotorized Treadmill.
Morgan AL; Laurent CM; Fullenkamp AM
J Strength Cond Res; 2016 Jul; 30(7):1898-905. PubMed ID: 27328274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Crossover Studies Comparing Physiological, Perceptual and Performance Measures Between Treadmill and Overground Running.
Miller JR; Van Hooren B; Bishop C; Buckley JD; Willy RW; Fuller JT
Sports Med; 2019 May; 49(5):763-782. PubMed ID: 30847825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Physiological and Perceptual Demands of Running on a Curved Nonmotorized Treadmill Compared With Running on a Motorized Treadmill Set at Different Grades.
Schoenmakers PPJM; Crisell JJ; Reed KE
J Strength Cond Res; 2020 May; 34(5):1197-1200. PubMed ID: 32187153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Physiological Demands of Trampolining at Different Intensities.
Draper N; Clement T; Alexander K
Res Q Exerc Sport; 2020 Mar; 91(1):136-141. PubMed ID: 31617827
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Treadmill running using an RPE-clamp model: mediators of perception and implications for exercise prescription.
Cochrane-Snyman KC; Housh TJ; Smith CM; Hill EC; Jenkins NDM
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2019 Sep; 119(9):2083-2094. PubMed ID: 31372804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantification of aerobic determinants of performance in post-pubertal adolescent middle-distance runners.
Blagrove RC; Howatson G; Pedlar CR; Hayes PR
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2019 Aug; 119(8):1865-1874. PubMed ID: 31209572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The validity of endurance running performance on the Curve 3(TM) non-motorised treadmill.
Stevens CJ; Hacene J; Wellham B; Sculley DV; Callister R; Taylor L; Dascombe BJ
J Sports Sci; 2015; 33(11):1141-8. PubMed ID: 25490348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The effect of glycogen reduction on cardiorespiratory and metabolic responses during downhill running.
Gavin JP; Myers SD; Willems ME
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2015 May; 115(5):1125-33. PubMed ID: 25552372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cardiorespiratory Responses to Downhill Versus Uphill Running in Endurance Athletes.
Lemire M; Lonsdorfer-Wolf E; Isner-Horobeti ME; Kouassi BYL; Geny B; Favret F; Dufour SP
Res Q Exerc Sport; 2018 Dec; 89(4):511-517. PubMed ID: 30230980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of parameters derived from a three-minute all-out test with classical benchmarks for running exercise.
Sousa FAB; Manchado-Gobatto FB; Rodrigues NA; Gobatto CA
PLoS One; 2022; 17(3):e0266012. PubMed ID: 35324999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A Comparison of Both Motorized and Nonmotorized Treadmill Gait Kinematics to Overground Locomotion.
Fullenkamp AM; Tolusso DV; Laurent CM; Campbell BM; Cripps AE
J Sport Rehabil; 2018 Jul; 27(4):357-363. PubMed ID: 28605231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Is the maximal lactate steady state concept really relevant to predict endurance performance?
Niemeyer M; Gündisch M; Steinecke G; Knaier R; Beneke R
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2022 Oct; 122(10):2259-2269. PubMed ID: 35849182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Relating cardiorespiratory responses to work rate during incremental ramp exercise on treadmill in children and adolescents: sex and age differences.
Lai N; Fiutem JJ; Pfaff N; Salvadego D; Strainic J
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2021 Oct; 121(10):2731-2741. PubMed ID: 34143305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Changes in heart rate variability with respect to exercise intensity and time during treadmill running.
Hunt KJ; Saengsuwan J
Biomed Eng Online; 2018 Sep; 17(1):128. PubMed ID: 30249267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Steady-state [Formula: see text] above MLSS: evidence that critical speed better represents maximal metabolic steady state in well-trained runners.
Nixon RJ; Kranen SH; Vanhatalo A; Jones AM
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2021 Nov; 121(11):3133-3144. PubMed ID: 34351531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Modeling lactate threshold in young squad athletes: influence of sex, maximal oxygen uptake, and cost of running.
Ji S; Keller S; Zwingmann L; Wahl P
Eur J Appl Physiol; 2023 Mar; 123(3):573-583. PubMed ID: 36411398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
