The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Validation of the COSMED K4 b2 Portable Metabolic System
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to assess the accuracy of the COSMED K4 b2 portable metabolic measurement system against the criterion Douglas bag (DB) method. During cycle ergometry on consecutive days, oxygen consumption (VO2), carbon dioxide production (VCO2), minute ventilation (VE), and respiratory exchange ratio (R) were measured at rest and during power outputs of 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250W. No significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed in VO2 between the K4 b2 and DB at rest and at 250W. Though the K4 b2 values were significantly higher (P<0.05) than DB values at 50, 100, 150, and 200 W, the magnitude of these differences was small (0.088, 0.092, 0.096, and 0.088 L x min(-1), respectively). VCO2 and VE values from the K4 b2 were significantly lower than the DB at 200 and 250 W, while no significant differences were observed from rest through 150W. The slight overestimation of VO2 (50-200 W) combined with the underestimation of VCO2 (200 and 250W) by the K4 b2 resulted in significantly lower R values at every stage. These findings suggest the COSMED K4 b2 portable metabolic measurement system is acceptable for measuring oxygen uptake over a fairly wide range of exercise intensities.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“McLaughlin et al 18 found that the COSMED K4 b 2 overestimated VO 2 consumption during cycle ergometer exercise by 50-200 W when compared with the Douglas bag method.”
From Metabolic Costs of Military Load Carriage over Complex Terrain (2018) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“The calorimeter model in question consistently exceeds well-validated laboratory systems under similar conditions by magnitudes ranging from 2% to 25% (22–28).”
From Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure? (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
In the citing paper
“The Douglas bag, mass spectrometer, and other laboratory-based metabolic system assessments of the validity of the Cosmed K4b2 unit (22–28) we used reported positive, but consistent within-study bias ranging from 2% to 25% across the relevant measurement range.”
From Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure? (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
In the citing paper
“Equally important, accuracy metrics for individuals could misrepresent equation predictive accuracy because the measurement variability of the portable calorimeter (22–28, Fig. 3) would be present to an unknown extent.”
From Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure? (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Calibration of two objective measures of physical activity for children
Evenson, K. R., Catellier, D. J., Gill, K., Ondrak, K. S., & McMurray, R. G. (2008) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640410802334196 · Cited by 2,677
Validation of the GENEA Accelerometer
ESLIGER, D. W., ROWLANDS, A. V., HURST, T. L., CATT, M., MURRAY, P., & ESTON, R. G. (2011) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31820513be · Cited by 625
Measurement of energy expenditure
Levine, J. A. (2005) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1079/phn2005800 · Cited by 401
Energy Costs of Physical Activities in Children and Adolescents
HARRELL, J. S., MCMURRAY, R. G., BAGGETT, C. D., PENNELL, M. L., PEARCE, P. F., & BANGDIWALA, S. I. (2005) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000153115.33762.3f · Cited by 374
Estimating energy expenditure using accelerometers
Crouter, S. E., Churilla, J. R., & Bassett, D. R. (2006) · European Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1007/s00421-006-0307-5 · Cited by 366
Metadata
- Authors
- McLaughlin, J. E., King, G. A., Howley, E. T., Bassett, Jr., & Ainsworth, B. E.
- Venue
- International Journal of Sports Medicine
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2001-05
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 280-284
- ISSN
- 0172-4622
- 1439-3964
- Cited by
- 374
- References
- 0
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
