Cited by 536Cardiovascular and exercise physiologyPhysical Activity and HealthCardiovascular Effects of Exercise

A comparative analysis of four protocols for maximal treadmill stress testing

Pollock, Michael L., Bohannon, Richard L., Cooper, Kenneth H., Ayres, John J., Ward, Ann, White, Steve R., Linnerud, A.C.·1976·American Heart Journal

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to compare the results from four commonly used maximal treadmill stress tests: Balke, Bruce, Ellestad, and a continuous multistage running protocol. The results compared serial and maximal heart rate, metabolic demands, and ECG determinations. Fifty-one healthy men, 35 to 55 years of age, volunteered for this study and were dichotomized into trained and untrained subjects. Regression analyses showed all the tests to correlate highly. No significant differences were found between tests at maximum for V02, heart rate, and blood pressure, except for V02 for the Balke as compared to the running protocol (39 vs. 41 ml./Kg-min). The Balke protocol showed lower values at maximum in VE and RP than the other three tests as well as the most gradual rate of progression in MET cost (0.5 METS per minute). The increase for the Bruce and Ellestad tests was from 1 to 1.5 METS per minute, and a rapid initial increase (9 METS in the first 3 minutes) made the running test undesirable as a screening method. Although serial plots of heart rate and MET costs were similar to those previously reported for different population samples, the present data further refined these values. Finally, a nomograph comparing treadmill time and V02, max. for the Balke, Bruce, and Ellestad tests was developed from these data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-8703(76)80401-2

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The fittest men and women had 43% and 53% lower risks of all-cause mortality and 47% and 70% lower risks of cardiovascular disease mortality, respectively, compared with the least fit peers.

    “the fittest men and women had 43% and 53% lower risks of all-cause mortality and 47% and 70% lower risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality, respectively, compared with the least fit peers [45]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pollock, M. L., Bohannon, R. L., Cooper, K. H., Ayres, J. J., Ward, A., White, S. R., & Linnerud, A. C.
Corresponding author
Pollock, Michael L.
Venue
American Heart Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1976-07
Volume
92
Issue
1
Pages
39-46
ISSN
0002-8703 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1990558893
Cited by
536
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 21
FWCI
11.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Keywords
Bruce protocol, VO2max, heart rate response, blood pressure response, respiratory exchange ratio, trained vs untrained subjects, nomogram, exercise screening
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Pressure, Physical Exertion, Heart Function Tests, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen Consumption

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review