The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ventilatory Efficiency during Exercise in Healthy Subjects
Abstract
When evaluating dyspnea in patients with heart or lung disease it is useful to measure the quantity of ventilation needed to eliminate metabolically produced CO2 (i.e., the ventilatory efficiency). Mathematically, the relationship between ventilation (VE) and CO2 output is determined by the arterial CO2 pressure and the physiologic dead space-tidal volume ratio. We decided to determine how age, sex, size, fitness, and the type of ergometer influenced ventilatory efficiency in normal subjects. Three methods were compared for expressing this relationship: (1) the VE versus CO2 output slope below the ventilatory compensation point, commonly used by cardiologists for estimating the severity of heart failure; (2) the VE/CO2 output ratio at the anaerobic threshold, commonly used by pulmonologists; and (3) the lowest VE/CO2 output ratio during exercise, the latter parameter not previously reported. We studied 474 healthy adults, between 17 and 78 years of age during incremental cycle and treadmill cardiopulmonary exercise tests at three test sites, correcting the total VE for the equipment dead space. The lowest VE/CO2 output ratio was insignificantly different from the ratio at the anaerobic threshold, less variable than that for the slope relationship, and unaffected by the site, ergometer, and gas exchange measurement systems. The regression equation for the lowest VE/CO2 output ratio was 27.94 + 0.108 x age + (0.97 = F, 0.0 = M) - 0.0376 x height, where age is in years and height is in centimeters. We conclude that the lowest VE/CO2 output ratio is the preferred noninvasive method to estimate ventilatory inefficiency.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A new method for detecting anaerobic threshold by gas exchange
Beaver, W. L., Wasserman, K., & Whipp, B. J. (1986) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/jappl.1986.60.6.2020 · Cited by 4,103
Self-citation
Cited by
Balady, G. J., Arena, R., Sietsema, K., Myers, J., Coke, L., Fletcher, G. F., Forman, D., Franklin, B., Guazzi, M., Gulati, M., et al. (2010) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e3181e52e69 · Cited by 1,964
Cardiorespiratory Reference Data in Older Adults: The Generation 100 Study
STENSVOLD, D., BUCHER SANDBAKK, S., VIKEN, H., ZISKO, N., REITLO, L. S., NAUMAN, J., GAUSTAD, S. E., HASSEL, E., MOUFACK, M., BRØNSTAD, E., et al. (2017) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000001343 · Cited by 46
Guio de Prada, V., Ortega, J. F., Morales-Palomo, F., Ramirez-Jimenez, M., Moreno-Cabañas, A., & Mora-Rodriguez, R. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0225893 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Sun, X.-G., Hansen, J. E., Garatachea, N., Storer, T. W., & Wasserman, K.
- Venue
- American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-12-01
- Volume
- 166
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1443-1448
- ISSN
- 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
- 1535-4970
- OpenAlex
- W1981671170
- Cited by
- 413
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ventilatory Efficiency during Exercise in Healthy Subjects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.2202033
- The paper
- Sun, X.-G., Hansen, J. E., Garatachea, N., Storer, T. W., & Wasserman, K. (2002). Ventilatory Efficiency during Exercise in Healthy Subjects. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.2202033
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.