Estimated power output for a
distance run and maximal oxygen
uptake in young adults
Gen-Min Lin1,2*, Kun-Zhe Tsai 1,2,3, Xuemei Sui4 and Carl J. Lavie5*
1Department of Internal Medicine, Hualien Armed Forces General Hospital, Hualien City, Taiwan,
2Department of Medicine, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan,
3Department of Stomatology of Periodontology, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, 4Department of
Exercise Science, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, United States,
5Ochsner Clinical School, John Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute, The University of Queensland School of
Medicine, New Orleans, LA, United States
Background: Both cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and run ﬁeld tests are
recommended by the American Heart Association for assessing the maximal oxygen
uptake (VO2 max) of youth. Power output was highly correlated with VO2 max in
CPET. However, it is unclear regarding the correlations of time and estimated power
output (EPO) for a run ﬁeld test with VO2 max obtained from CPET in young adults.
Methods: This study included 45 participants, aged 20–40 years, from a sample of
1,120 military personnel who completed a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test in Taiwan in 2020.
The participants subsequently received CPET using the Bruce protocol to assess VO2
max in the same year. According to the physics rule, EPO (watts) for the run ﬁeld test
was deﬁned as the product of half body mass (kg) and [distance (3000-m)/time (s) for
a run ﬁeld test]. Pearson product–moment correlation analyses were performed.
Results: The Pearson correlation coefﬁcient (r) of time against EPO for the run ﬁeld
test was estimated to be 0.708 (p <0.001). The correlation coefﬁcient between the
time for the run ﬁeld test and VO2 max (L/min) in CPET was estimated to be 0.462 (p =
0.001). In contrast, the correlation coefﬁcient between time for the run ﬁeld test and
VO2 max scaled to body mass in CPET was estimated to be 0.729 (p <0.001). The
correlation coefﬁcient of EPO for the run ﬁeld test against VO2 max in CPET was
estimated to be 0.813 (p <0.001).
Conclusion: In young adults, although the time for a run ﬁeld test was a reliable
estimate of VO2 max scaled to body mass, EPO proportional to the mean square
velocity was found as a superior estimate of VO2 max.
KEYWORDS
cardiopulmonary exercise testing, maximal oxygen uptake, estimated power output, run
ﬁeld test, velocity
Introduction
Cardiorespiratory ﬁtness (CRF) is inversely associated with the risk of metabolic syndrome,
diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), and mortality in the general population
(Carnethon et al., 2009; Mehta et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2022; Sui et al., 2022).
Obtaining greater CRF levels for sedentary individuals has been proposed as one of the major
preventive measures to reduce the severity and burden of atherosclerosis in developed countries
(Lavie et al., 2019; Sanchis-Gomar et al., 2022). The gold standard for CRF assessment is
maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) with or without an adjustment for body mass from
cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). The main advantages of CPET include a strictly
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Elisabetta Salvioni,
Monzino Cardiology Center (IRCCS), Italy
REVIEWED BY
Maurizio Bussotti,
Scientiﬁc Clinical Institute Maugeri (ICS
Maugeri), Italy
Yaoshan Dun,
Xiangya Hospital, Central South University,
China
*CORRESPONDENCE
Gen-Min Lin,
farmer507@yahoo.com.tw
Carl J. Lavie,
clavie@ochsner.org
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to Exercise
Physiology,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Physiology
RECEIVED 05 December 2022
ACCEPTED 20 January 2023
PUBLISHED 07 February 2023
CITATION
Lin G-M, Tsai K-Z, Sui X and Lavie CJ
(2023), Estimated power output for a
distance run and maximal oxygen uptake
in young adults.
Front. Physiol. 14:1110802.
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
COPYRIGHT
© 2023 Lin, Tsai, Sui and Lavie. This is an
open-access article distributed under the
terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY). The use,
distribution or reproduction in other
forums is permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are
credited and that the original publication in
this journal is cited, in accordance with
accepted academic practice. No use,
distribution or reproduction is permitted
which does not comply with these terms.
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
01
TYPE Original Research
PUBLISHED 07 February 2023
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
controlled environment, e.g., a maintained indoor temperature,
atmospheric pressure, and calibration gas. However, the limitation
to CPET is facility-dependent, and examinees require a tolerance to
wear a mask during the graded exercise testing. Therefore, CPET may
not be feasible for some speciﬁc populations, such as children and the
elderly, and might not be practical at a large population level.
Based on the ﬁndings of previous studies, the American Heart
Association (AHA) has recommended VO2 max and some alternative
measures for the CRF levels of youth (Mayorga-Vega et al., 2015;
Raghuveer et al., 2020). For instance, the performance of a ﬁeld-based
20-m shuttle run test or distance run test has a moderate-to-high
correlation with VO2 max obtained from CPET, whereas the
performance of a ﬁeld-based step test or 6-minute walk test has
only a low-to-moderate correlation with VO2 max in children or
adolescents (Raghuveer et al., 2020).
In addition, previous studies also revealed that the peak power output
of the heart or body measured in CPET has a high correlation with VO2
max in patients with recovering heart failure and athletes (Hawley and
Noakes, 1992; Jakovljevic et al., 2011). Physiologically, most oxygen
uptake is translated to energy output during peak exercise. However,
to the best of our knowledge, there have been no studies with regard to the
correlation between estimated power output (EPO) for a run ﬁeld test and
VO2 max in CPET. The correlation between a run test performance and
VO2 max in CPET was not clariﬁed in adults and varied by study (Cooper,
1968; O’Gorman et al., 2000; Casajus and Castagna, 2007). The aim of this
study was to investigate the correlations of time and EPO for a distance
run ﬁeld test with VO2 max measured from CPET in a group of young
military adults.
Materials and methods
Study population
The study included 45 participants, aged 20–40 years, without any
medication use, randomly selected from the cardiorespiratory ﬁtness and
health in eastern armed forces (CHIEF) study participants (N = 1,120)
(Lin et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2021) in 2020, which aimed to carry out a
preliminary study on the correlation of time for a 3000-m run ﬁeld test
with VO2 max from CPET. All participants received exercise training
daily, e.g., a 3,000-m run within 25 min in the morning at the military base
for over 6 months. A history of moderate physical activity, such as a
limited-time 3,000-m run in the morning per week in the past half year,
was obtained from each participant. Each participant underwent the
2020 annual health examinations for physical examinations (Hsu et al.,
2022) in the Hualien Armed Forces General Hospital of Taiwan. Each
participant also underwent the 2020 annual military exercise test for a
3,000-m run ﬁeld test to assess endurance capacity. Within 2 weeks of the
3,000-run ﬁeld test, the 45 volunteers were scheduled for CPET to
objectively assess VO2 max.
Anthropometric and blood pressure (BP)
measurements
Anthropometric parameters, i.e., body height and weight, were
measured in a standing position by a medical staff member in the
annual military exercise test. Body mass index was deﬁned as the body
weight divided by body height squared (kg/m2). Overweight or obesity
was deﬁned as a body mass index ≥27.5 kg/2 for Asians, according to
the recommendations of the World Health Organization (Jih et al.,
2014). The BP and pulse rate of each participant were automatically
measured using the same device (FT201, Parama-Tech Co., Ltd.,
Fukuoka, Japan), which utilized the oscillometric method (Lin
et al., 2016; Lin et al., 2020a; Lin et al., 2020b). The BP was
measured once over the right arm in a sitting position after resting
for longer than 15 min and was recorded by a medical staff member. If
the pulse rate was ≥90 beats per minute, systolic BP ≥140 mmHg, or
diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg was found, the participant would undergo
another two rounds of hemodynamic parameter measurements, which
were averaged as the ﬁnal result.
The 3000-m run ﬁeld test
The 3,000-m run ﬁeld test was performed outdoors on a ﬂat
playground of the Military Physical Training and Testing Center in
Hualien, Taiwan, at 16:00. Each participant wore sweat suits and did
not carry any additional objects. The whole running process of each
participant was video recorded and supervised by eight military sports
ofﬁcers. The 3,000-m run ﬁeld test was carried out if there was no heavy
rain, and the coefﬁcient of the heat stroke risk formula, the product of
relative humidity (%) and outdoor temperature (Celsius scale) x 0.1, was
less than 40. The time for the 3,000-m run ﬁeld test was utilized to evaluate
the endurance capacity of each participant. EPO for the run ﬁeld test was
deﬁned as “1/2 x body mass (kg) x square of mean velocity (m/s),” on the
basis of the physics rule of the kinetic energy theorem (Serway and Jewett,
2004). The mean velocity was calculated by the formula “distance (3,000-
m) divided by time (s) for the run ﬁeld test.”
The performance of CPET
CPET was performed on a Trackmaster TMX-428 stress treadmill
(SCHILLER, Baar, Switzerland) using the standard Bruce protocol.
The same supervisor conducted all of the CPETs throughout the study.
All participants were asked not to consume caffeine or alcohol for 12 h
or longer before the CPET and exercised after a 2-h postprandial
period. The room for the CPET used an air conditioning system to
maintain a constant temperature of approximately 22 degrees Celsius.
Throughout the CPET, electrocardiography and BP were monitored.
The rates of oxygen uptake (VO2), production of carbon dioxide
(VCO2), tidal volume (Vt), end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide
(PETCO2), and respiratory rate were recorded breath by breath using a
Cardiovit CS-200 Excellence Ergo-Spiro analytic system (SCHILLER,
Baar, Switzerland). VO2 max was deﬁned as the average of VO2 during
the last minute of maximal exercise.
Statistical analysis
Characteristics of overall participants for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and
those for both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and CPET were presented as
numbers (%) for categorical variables and mean ± standard deviation for
continuous variables, respectively. Continuous variables were compared
using analysis of variance if the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for the normal
distribution was met; otherwise, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used.
Categorical variables were compared using Fisher’s exact test. The Pearson
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
02
Lin et al.
10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
product–moment correlation coefﬁcient was used to determine the
association strength of time and EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test with
VO2 max scaled to body mass or not in CPET. The correlations of time
and EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test were performed for a comparison
between selected participants for both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and CPET
and a sample of age-, sex-, body mass index-, and BP-matched
participants from the overall study participants. Scatter plots between
time and EPO for the 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and VO2 max scaled for body
mass or not in CPET were obtained. Internal validation was performed for
those whose body mass index <27.5 kg/m2. A value of p <0.05 was
considered signiﬁcant. All analyses were carried out using SPSS version
25.0 for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, United States). This study
has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Clinical Ethics
Committee of the Mennonite Christian Hospital (No. 16-05-008),
Hualien City, Eastern Taiwan, R.O.C., and written informed consent
was obtained from all participants.
Results
Clinical characteristics of the participants
Table 1 shows the clinical characteristics of the participants for a
3,000-m run ﬁeld test (N = 1,120) and those for both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld
test and CPET (N = 45). The characteristics of the selected participants for
CPET were similar to the original overall sample, except greater age, pulse
rate, and BP levels were observed in participants for CPET. The mean age
of the participants for CPET was approximately 30 years old, and over
90% of the participants were males. Since only one woman was included
for the CPET, the characteristics of men were also compared between the
original group (N = 911) and the selected group (N = 44), and the results
are provided in Supplementary Table S1, which show consistent ﬁndings.
Correlations between time and EPO for a
3000-m run ﬁeld test
The correlation coefﬁcient (r) of time against EPO for a 3,000-m
run ﬁeld test was estimated to be 0.708 (p <0.001) in participants for
both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and CPET (Figure 1A), which was close to
the correlation coefﬁcient (r = 0.703 and p <0.001) in the age-, sex-,
body mass index-, and BP-matched samples of 707 participants for a
3000-m run test (Figure 1B). The characteristics of the variable-
matched population are provided in Supplementary Table S2. The
correlation coefﬁcients for men only were in line with the main
ﬁndings, and the results are provided in Supplementary Figure S1.
Correlations of time for a 3000-m run ﬁeld
test against VO2 max in CPET
The correlation coefﬁcient of time for a 3000-m run ﬁeld test
against VO2 max (L/min) in CPET was estimated to be 0.462 (p =
0.001) (Figure 2A). In contrast, the correlation coefﬁcient between
time for a 3000-m run ﬁeld test and VO2 max scaled to body mass (kg)
in CPET was estimated to be 0.729 (p <0.001) (Figure 2B). The
correlation coefﬁcients for men only were in line with the main
ﬁndings, and the results are provided in Supplementary Figure S2.
Correlations of EPO for a 3000-m run
ﬁeld test against VO2 max in CPET
The correlation coefﬁcient of EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test against
VO2 max (L/min) in CPET was estimated to be 0.813 (p <0.001)
(Figure 3A). However, the correlation coefﬁcient between EPO for a
3,000-m run ﬁeld test and VO2 max scaled to body mass (kg) in CPET
was estimated to be only 0.364 (p <0.001) (Figure 3B). The correlation
coefﬁcients for men only were in line with the main ﬁndings, and the
results are provided in Supplementary Figure S3.
Internal validation for non-obese participants
The results of interval validation for participants with body mass
index <27.5 kg/m2 (N = 35) are revealed in Figure 4. The correlation
coefﬁcient of time for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test against VO2 max (L/min)
was 0.453 (p = 0.006) (Figure 4A), and the correlation coefﬁcient of time
for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test with VO2 max scaled to body mass (kg) was
0.485 (p = 0.003) (Figure 4B). The correlation coefﬁcient of EPO for a
3,000-m run ﬁeld test with VO2 max (L/min) was 0.757 (p <0.001)
(Figure 4C), and the correlation coefﬁcient of EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld
FIGURE 1
(A) Correlation coefﬁcient (r) of time against EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test, estimated to be 0.708 (p <0.001) in participants for both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld
test and CPET. (B) Correlation coefﬁcient estimated to be 0.703 (p <0.001) in the variable-matched participants for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test.
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
03
Lin et al.
10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
TABLE 1 Clinical Characteristics of the Overall Participants for a Run Field Test and the Selected Participants for a Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing.
N = 45
N = 1120
p-value
Sex, males (%)
44 (97.8)
911 (81.3)
0.07
Age, years
29.93 ± 7.05
27.61 ± 5.87
0.01
Body height, cm
170.74 ± 6.47
170.80 ± 6.67
0.93
Body mass, kg
72.74 ± 11.81
71.93 ± 12.21
0.66
Body mass index, kg/m2
24.95 ± 3.86
24.58 ± 3.54
0.49
Pulse rate, beats per min
77.50 ± 11.18
67.09 ± 10.95
<0.001
Systolic blood pressure, mmHg
127.68 ± 11.83
116.97 ± 12.83
<0.001
Diastolic blood pressure, mmHg
80.32 ± 10.39
69.09 ± 9.88
<0.001
Time for a 3000-m run, secs
876.62 ± 94.34
893.55 ± 106.19
0.29
EPO for a 3000-m run, watts
437.44 ± 105.22
421.12 ± 114.18
0.34
Moderate activity per week
100-150 minutes
8 (17.8)
224 (20.0)
0.92
150-300 minutes
18 (40.0)
423 (37.8)
>300 minutes
19 (42.2)
473 (42.2)
Abbreviation: EPO, estimated power output.
EPO was deﬁned as 1/2 x body mass (kg) x (3000-m/time for a 3000-m run test)2.
FIGURE 2
In 45 participants, for both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and CPET: (A) correlation coefﬁcient of time for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test against VO2 max (L/min) was
0.462 (p = 0.001); (B) correlation coefﬁcient of time for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test with VO2 max scaled to body mass (kg) was 0.729 (p <0.001).
FIGURE 3
In 45 participants, for both a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and CPET: (A) correlation coefﬁcient of EPO for a 3000-m run ﬁeld test against VO2 max (L/min) was
0.813 (p <0.001); (B) correlation coefﬁcient between EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and VO2 max scaled to body mass (kg) was estimated to be 0.364
(p <0.001).
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
04
Lin et al.
10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
test against VO2 max scaled to body mass (kg) was 0.349 (p = 0.04)
(Figure 4D). Although the correlation coefﬁcients in the sample for
interval validation were all lower than that in the overall sample (N =
45) receiving the CPET, all of the associations of time and EPO for a
3,000-m run with VO2 max in a CPET were signiﬁcant, and the EPO
association remained with the greatest strength.
Estimation of VO2 max in CPET from time and
EPO for a run ﬁeld test
Based on the regression line in Figure 2B, formula 1, with regard to
time for a run ﬁeld test to estimate VO2 max scaled to body mass, can
be derived as follows:
Formula 1
Y = −0.0386X + 67.151
X: Time for a 3,000-m ﬁeld run (s)
Y: VO2 max scaled to body mass (mL/min/kg)
Based on the regression line in Figure 3A, formula 2, with regard to
EPO for a run ﬁeld test to estimate VO2 max, can be derived as follows:
Formula 2
Y = 3.7943X + 757.6
X: EPO for a 3000-m ﬁeld run (watts)
Y: VO2 max (mL/min)
Discussion
The principal ﬁnding of this study was that in young adults, the time
for a run ﬁeld test can be an acceptable estimate of VO2 max scaled to
body mass obtained in CPET. In addition, the EPO for a run ﬁeld test,
calculated according to the kinetic energy theorem, can be a more precise
estimate of VO2 max (L/min) than the time for a run ﬁeld test.
Numerous studies have investigated the correlation between distance-
or time-based run ﬁeld test performance and VO2 max in CPET in adults
(Mayorga-Vega et al., 2016). However, the correlation coefﬁcients were
distributed widely, ranging from 0.60 to 0.90, among various run ﬁeld
tests (Cooper, 1968). In addition, no consensus has been reached in
previous studies to unify the VO2 max unit, with or without an
adjustment
for
body
mass,
when
analyzing
the
correlation.
Furthermore, the correlation coefﬁcients might vary even in the same
run ﬁeld test among different studies (Cooper, 1968; O’Gorman et al.,
2000; Casajus and Castagna, 2007). For instance, Cooper found a high
correlation between running distance and VO2 max scaled to body mass
in a 12-min run ﬁeld test in a sample of military males, in whom the
correlation coefﬁcient was estimated to be 0.897 (Cooper, 1968). In the
O’Gorman et al. (2000) study, there was a moderate correlation in a 12-
min run ﬁeld test and in a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test using a sample of
physically ﬁt young males, in whom the correlation coefﬁcient was
estimated equally to be 0.67 and −0.67. In contrast, the Casajus and
Castagna study revealed a relatively lower correlation in a 12-min run ﬁeld
test in a sample of elite soccer players, in whom the correlation coefﬁcient
was estimated to be only 0.46 (Casajus and Castagna, 2007). In the present
study, we demonstrated a moderate correlation of time for a 3,000-m run
ﬁeld test with VO2 max scaled to body mass, whereas the results showed a
relatively lower correlation with VO2 max, which was not scaled to body
mass. These ﬁndings are in line with previous studies and a meta-analysis
(Serway and Jewett, 2004) made by Mayorga-Vega et al., which showed
the correlation coefﬁcient between time for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and
VO2 max scaled to a body mass of 12 studies, including 951 young adults,
was estimated to be 0.70. We further highlighted the importance of the
VO2 max unit for examining the correlation. It is reasonable that the
FIGURE 4
In 35 participants with body mass index <27.5 kg/m2, for both a 3000-m run ﬁeld test and CPET: (A) correlation coefﬁcient of time for a 3000-m run ﬁeld
test against VO2 max (L/min) was estimated to be 0.453 (p = 0.006); (B) correlation coefﬁcient of time for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test against VO2 max scaled to
body mass (kg) was estimated to be 0.485 (p = 0.003); (C) correlation coefﬁcient of EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test with VO2 max (L/min) was 0.757
(p <0.001). (D) correlation coefﬁcient between EPO for a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test and VO2 max (L/min) scaled to body mass was 0.349 (p = 0.04).
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
05
Lin et al.
10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
examinees’ running velocity in run ﬁeld tests was inversely related to their
body mass. The correlation between the running velocity in a run ﬁeld test
and VO2 max scaled to body mass in CPET would theoretically result in
the optimal result, except that the examinees had a similar level of body
mass at baseline.
Some reports have shown a moderate-to-high correlation between
peak cardiac power output (Watts) and VO2 max (L/min) not scaled
to body mass in CPET in patients with heart failure, in whom the
greatest correlation coefﬁcient was 0.85, observed in those with
recovering heart function (Jakovljevic et al., 2011), and a high
correlation of peak power output with VO2 max in cycling athletes
(correlation coefﬁcient greater than 0.90) (Hawley and Noakes, 1992).
The present study is the ﬁrst report using EPO for a run ﬁeld test to
estimate VO2 max in CPET in young adults. Oxygen consumption
generates energy, heat, and waste. Accordingly, it is apt to use peak
exercise power output to assess VO2 max not adjusted for body mass
in CPET for adults. In the present study, EPO was calculated according
to the kinetic energy theorem and proportional to the square of the
mean velocity in a 3,000-m run ﬁeld test. The use of the square of the
mean velocity was better than the mean velocity in the run ﬁeld test to
correlate with VO2 max in CPET in adults. This ﬁnding is consistent
with a previous study on CPET, where peak power output was superior
to the cycling speed to estimate VO2 max in athletes (Hawley and
Noakes, 1992).
The present study, however, has a few limitations. First, the limited
number of enrolled subjects is the major limitation to this preliminary
study, and further study is required to expand the sample size to obtain
greater power. Second, this study included only one woman and lacked
multi-ethnic/racial diversity, making generalization of the results
difﬁcult. Third, although the annual military exercise test was held
with some restrictions of the weather, there could have been a bias for
differences in outdoor temperature and humidity, which may affect
the running performance and EPO estimation. Fourth, as the study
included merely healthy subjects, the results may not be appropriately
applied to those with a mismatch between heart and lung functions.
External validation should be performed in further study. Finally,
since we chose mean running velocity in the kinetic formula, the
maximum actual power output during the run test might be
underestimated, possibly leading to a bias for the correlation with
VO2 max.
Conclusion
There have been no recommendations from the AHA regarding the
role of time and EPO for a run ﬁeld test to evaluate VO2 max in adults,
and the VO2 max unit was not emphasized. Our ﬁndings suggest that in
young adults, although the time for a distance run ﬁeld test was an
acceptable estimate of VO2 max scaled to body mass, EPO proportional to
the square of the mean velocity in a run ﬁeld test was found as a superior
estimate of VO2 max than the time for a run ﬁeld test in this population.
Further studies are needed involving young women.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be
made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and
approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Clinical Ethics
Committee of the Mennonite Christian Hospital (No 16-05-008)
Hualien City, Eastern Taiwan. The patients/participants provided
their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
GL collected and interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript;
KT analyzed the data; XS and CL raised critical comments and edited
the text; GL was the principal investigator for the administration of the
study.
Funding
The present study was supported by grants from the Hualien Armed
Forces General Hospital (HAFGH-D-112004) and the Medical Affairs
Bureau, Ministry of National Defense (MND-MAB-D-112182).
Conﬂict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or ﬁnancial relationships that could be
construed as a potential conﬂict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their afﬁliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors, and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802/
full#supplementary-material
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
06
Lin et al.
10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802
References
Carnethon, M. R., Sternfeld, B., Schreiner, P. J., Jacobs, D. R., Jr, Lewis, C. E., Liu, K., et al.
(2009). Association of 20-year changes in cardiorespiratory ﬁtness with incident type
2 diabetes: The coronary artery risk development in young adults (CARDIA) ﬁtness study.
Diabetes Care 32 (7), 1284–1288. doi:10.2337/dc08-1971
Casajus, J. A., and Castagna, C. (2007). Aerobic ﬁtness and ﬁeld test performance in elite
Spanish soccer referees of different ages. J. Sci. Med. Sport 10 (6), 382–389. doi:10.1016/j.
jsams.2006.08.004
Cooper, K. H. (1968). A means of assessing maximal oxygen intake. Correlation between ﬁeld
and treadmill testing. JAMA 203 (3), 201–204. doi:10.1001/jama.1968.03140030033008
Hawley, J. A., and Noakes, T. D. (1992). Peak power output predicts maximal oxygen
uptake and performance time in trained cyclists. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 65
(1), 79–83. doi:10.1007/BF01466278
Hsu, C. Y., Liu, P. Y., Liu, S. H., Kwon, Y., Lavie, C. J., and Lin, G. M. (2022). Machine learning
for electrocardiographic features to identify left atrial enlargement in young adults: CHIEF heart
study. Front. Cardiovasc Med. 9, 840585. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.840585
Jakovljevic, D. G., Birks, E. J., George, R. S., Trenell, M. I., Seferovic, P. M., Yacoub, M.
H., et al. (2011). Relationship between peak cardiac pumping capability and selected
exercise-derived prognostic indicators in patients treated with left ventricular assist
devices. Eur. J. Heart Fail 13 (9), 992–999. doi:10.1093/eurjhf/hfr069
Jih, J., Mukherjea, A., Vittinghoff, E., Nguyen, T. T., Tsoh, J. Y., Fukuoka, Y., et al. (2014).
Using appropriate body mass index cut points for overweight and obesity among Asian
Americans. Prev. Med. 65, 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.010
Lavie, C. J., Ozemek, C., Carbone, S., Katzmarzyk, P. T., and Blair, S. N. (2019).
Sedentary behavior, exercise, and cardiovascular health. Circ. Res. 124 (5), 799–815. doi:10.
1161/CIRCRESAHA.118.312669
Lin, G. M., Li, Y. H., Lee, C. J., Shiang, J. C., Lin, K. H., Chen, K. W., et al. (2016).
Rationale and design of the cardiorespiratory ﬁtness and hospitalization events in armed
forces study in Eastern Taiwan. World J. Cardiol. 8 (8), 464–471. doi:10.4330/wjc.v8.i8.464
Lin, G. M., Liu, P. Y., Tsai, K. Z., Lin, Y. K., Huang, W. C., and Lavie, C. J. (2022).
Cardiorespiratory ﬁtness and carotid intima-media thickness in physically active young
adults: CHIEF atherosclerosis study. J. Clin. Med. 11 (13), 3653. doi:10.3390/jcm11133653
Lin, G. M., Tsai, K. Z., Lin, C. S., and Han, C. L. (2020). Physical ﬁtness and long-term
blood pressure variability in young male military personnel. Curr. Hypertens. Rev. 16 (2),
156–160. doi:10.2174/1573402115666191023111351
Lin, Y. K., Tsai, K. Z., Han, C. L., Lin, Y. P., Lee, J. T., and Lin, G. M. (2021). Obesity
phenotypes and electrocardiographic characteristics in physically active males: CHIEF
study. Front. Cardiovasc Med. 8, 738575. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2021.738575
Lin, Y. P., Fan, C. H., Tsai, K. Z., Lin, K. H., Han, C. L., and Lin, G. M. (2020).
Psychological stress and long-term blood pressure variability of military young males: The
cardiorespiratory ﬁtness and hospitalization events in armed forces study. World
J. Cardiol. 12 (12), 626–633. doi:10.4330/wjc.v12.i12.626
Liu, P. Y., Tsai, K. Z., Lima, J. A. C., Lavie, C. J., and Lin, G. M. (2021). Athlete’s heart in
asian military males: The CHIEF heart study. Front. Cardiovasc Med. 8, 725852. doi:10.
3389/fcvm.2021.725852
Mayorga-Vega, D., Aguilar-Soto, P., and Viciana, J. (2015). Criterion-related validity of
the 20-M shuttle run test for estimating cardiorespiratory ﬁtness: A meta-analysis. J. Sports
Sci. Med. 14 (3), 536–547.
Mayorga-Vega, D., Bocanegra-Parrilla, R., Ornelas, M., and Viciana, J. (2016). Criterion-
related validity of the distance- and time-based walk/run ﬁeld tests for estimating
cardiorespiratory ﬁtness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 11,
e0151671. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0151671
Mehta, A., Kondamudi, N., Laukkanen, J. A., Wisloff, U., Franklin, B. A., Arena, R.,
et al. (2020). Running away from cardiovascular disease at the right speed: The impact of
aerobic physical activity and cardiorespiratory ﬁtness on cardiovascular disease risk and
associated subclinical phenotypes. Prog. Cardiovasc Dis. 63 (6), 762–774. doi:10.1016/j.pcad.
2020.11.004
O’Gorman, D., Hunter, A., MacDonnacha, C., and Kirwan, J. P. (2000). Validity of ﬁeld
tests for evaluating endurance capacity in competitive and international-level sports
participants. J. Strength Cond. Res. 14 (1), 62–67. doi:10.1519/00124278-200002000-00011
Raghuveer, G., Hartz, J., Lubans, D. R., Takken, T., Wiltz, J. L., Mietus-Snyder, M., et al.
(2020). Cardiorespiratory ﬁtness in youth: An important marker of health: A scientiﬁc
statement from the American heart association. Circulation 142 (7), e101–e118. doi:10.
1161/CIR.0000000000000866
Sanchis-Gomar, F., Lavie, C. J., Marín, J., Perez-Quilis, C., Eijsvogels, T. M. H., O’Keefe,
J. H., et al. (2022). Exercise effects on cardiovascular disease: From basic aspects to clinical
evidence. Cardiovasc Res. 118 (10), 2253–2266. doi:10.1093/cvr/cvab272
Serway, R., and Jewett, J. W. (2004). Physics for scientists and engineers, 6th edition
Books/Cole. 0-534-40842-7.
Sui, X., Sarzynski, M. A., Gribben, N., Zhang, J., and Lavie, C. J. (2022).
Cardiorespiratory ﬁtness and the risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality
in men with hypercholesterolemia. J. Clin. Med. 11 (17), 5211. doi:10.3390/jcm11175211
Wang, S. H., Chung, P. S., Lin, Y. P., Tsai, K. Z., Lin, S. C., Fan, C. H., et al. (2021).
Metabolically healthy obesity and physical ﬁtness in military males in the CHIEF study.
Sci. Rep. 11 (1), 9088. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-88728-0
Frontiers in Physiology
frontiersin.org
07
Lin et al.
10.3389/fphys.2023.1110802

Estimated power output for a distance run and maximal oxygen uptake in young adults.
Lin, Gen-Min,Tsai, Kun-Zhe,Sui, Xuemei,Lavie, Carl J