RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness without exercise testing
Cross-validation in midlife and older women
Clasey, J. L., Adams, A. M., Geiger, P. J., Segerstrom, S. C., & Crofford, L. J. (2020). Estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness without exercise testing: Cross-validation in midlife and older women. Women's Health Reports, 1(1), 584-591. https://doi.org/10.1089/whr.2020.0045
Background: Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is associated with important health risk outcomes, including the development of Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Measures of maximal or peak oxygen consumption (VO2) are the typical criterion methods for determining CRF; however, in clinical settings, these measures are impractical.
Methods: We validated a clinically derived estimate of CRF against predicted maximal VO2 in a sample of healthy, midlife and older adult women (n = 188). Women completed a clinic evaluation (including treadmill testing), daily diaries about their physical activity, and additional clinical scales. Two models were tested. The first model calculated estimated cardiorespiratory fitness (eCRF) using assigned weights and regressed eCRF on predicted cardiorespiratory fitness (pCRF). The second model used sample-specific, empirical weights. Both models were tested twice, once with retrospective and once with daily diary physical activity reports.
Results: The model accounted for 34% of the variance in pCRF when using assigned weights and 41% of the variance in pCRF when using empirical weights. For age, body mass index, and resting heart rate, assigned and estimated weights were similar, but estimates for physical activity differed. There was little improvement in model fit between retrospective and daily diary measurements of physical activity when either assigned (R2 = 0.32) or fitted weights (R2 = 0.40) were used.
Conclusions: Midlife and older women's CRF can be estimated from routinely collected clinical measures, demonstrating their utility.
