The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Guidelines to Classify Female Subject Groups in Sport-Science Research
Abstract
Aim: To review current cycling-related sport-science literature to formulate guidelines to classify female subject groups and to compare this classification system for female subject groups with the classification system for male subject groups. Methods: A database of 82 papers that described female subject groups containing information on preexperimental maximal cycle-protocol designs, terminology, biometrical and physiological parameters, and cycling experience was analyzed. Subject groups were divided into performance levels (PLs), according to the nomenclature. Body mass, body-mass index, maximal oxygen consumption (VO 2max ), peak power output (PPO), and training status were compared between PLs and between female and male PLs. Results: Five female PLs were defined, representing untrained, active, trained, well-trained, and professional female subjects. VO 2max and PPO significantly increased with PL, except for PL3 and PL4 ( P < .01). For each PL, significant differences were observed in absolute and relative VO 2max and PPO between male and female subject groups. Relative VO 2max is the most cited parameter for female subject groups and is proposed as the principal parameter to classify the groups. Conclusion: This systematic review shows the large variety in the description of female subject groups in the existing literature. The authors propose a standardized preexperimental testing protocol and guidelines to classify female subject groups into 5 PLs based on relative VO 2max , relative PPO, training status, absolute VO 2max , and absolute PPO.
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
“Tier 2: Trained/Developmental is estimated from national reports of sport participation rates to include ∼12% to 19% of the population.[25][26][27]”
From Defining Training and Performance Caliber: A Participant Classification Framework (2022) · cites this paper as [26]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Defining Training and Performance Caliber: A Participant Classification Framework
McKay, A. K. A., Stellingwerff, T., Smith, E. S., Martin, D. T., Mujika, I., Goosey-Tolfrey, V. L., Sheppard, J., & Burke, L. M. (2022) · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · doi:10.1123/ijspp.2021-0451 · Cited by 3,093
“(3) Medalist/top 3 at continental-level or international events.”
BackgroundMeasuring Physical Demands in Basketball: An Explorative Systematic Review of Practices
Russell, J. L., McLean, B. D., Impellizzeri, F. M., et al. (2020) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.1007/s40279-020-01375-9 · Cited by 144
Casado, A., González‐Mohíno, F., González‐Ravé, J. M., & Foster, C. (2022) · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · doi:10.1123/ijspp.2021-0435 · Cited by 151
Self-citationA new model of performance classification to standardize the research results in swimming
Ruiz-Navarro, J. J., López‐Belmonte, Ó., Gay, A., et al. (2022) · European Journal of Sport Science · doi:10.1080/17461391.2022.2046174 · Cited by 123
Mattu, A. T., Iannetta, D., MacInnis, M. J., Doyle–Baker, P. K., & Murias, J. M. (2019) · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports · doi:10.1111/sms.13590 · Cited by 103
Metadata
- Authors
- Decroix, L., De Pauw, K., Foster, C., & Meeusen, R.
- Affiliations
- Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Meeusen, Romain
- Venue
- International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
- Publisher
- Human Kinetics
- Published
- 2016-03
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 204-213
- ISSN
- 1555-0265 (ISSN-L)
- 1555-0273
- OpenAlex
- W4240624835
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 6.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (publishedVersion)
- VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Vrije Universiteit Brussel
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Keywords
- subject classification, cycling, VO2max, peak power, training status, sex differences, performance level, body mass index, body mass
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