Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
, 11 (3), e0151671
eCollection

Criterion-Related Validity of the Distance- And Time-Based Walk/Run Field Tests for Estimating Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Review

Criterion-Related Validity of the Distance- And Time-Based Walk/Run Field Tests for Estimating Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Daniel Mayorga-Vega et al. PLoS One.

Abstract

Objectives: The main purpose of the present meta-analysis was to examine the criterion-related validity of the distance- and time-based walk/run tests for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness among apparently healthy children and adults.

Materials and methods: Relevant studies were searched from seven electronic bibliographic databases up to August 2015 and through other sources. The Hunter-Schmidt's psychometric meta-analysis approach was conducted to estimate the population criterion-related validity of the following walk/run tests: 5,000 m, 3 miles, 2 miles, 3,000 m, 1.5 miles, 1 mile, 1,000 m, ½ mile, 600 m, 600 yd, ¼ mile, 15 min, 12 min, 9 min, and 6 min.

Results: From the 123 included studies, a total of 200 correlation values were analyzed. The overall results showed that the criterion-related validity of the walk/run tests for estimating maximum oxygen uptake ranged from low to moderate (rp = 0.42-0.79), with the 1.5 mile (rp = 0.79, 0.73-0.85) and 12 min walk/run tests (rp = 0.78, 0.72-0.83) having the higher criterion-related validity for distance- and time-based field tests, respectively. The present meta-analysis also showed that sex, age and maximum oxygen uptake level do not seem to affect the criterion-related validity of the walk/run tests.

Conclusions: When the evaluation of an individual's maximum oxygen uptake attained during a laboratory test is not feasible, the 1.5 mile and 12 min walk/run tests represent useful alternatives for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness. As in the assessment with any physical fitness field test, evaluators must be aware that the performance score of the walk/run field tests is simply an estimation and not a direct measure of cardiorespiratory fitness.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow diagram of the study selection process.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Scatter plot of sample size against criterion-related validity coefficients (r) of distance-based walk/run tests for estimating maximal oxygen uptake: (a) 5,000 m walk/run test; (b) 2 miles walk/run test; (c) 3,000 m walk/run test; (d) 1.5 mile walk/run test; and (e) 1 mile walk/run test.
Dashed line represents median values of validity coefficients.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Scatter plot of sample size against criterion-related validity coefficients (r) of time-based walk/run tests for estimating maximal oxygen uptake: (a) 12 min walk/run test; and (b) 9 min walk/run test.
Dashed line represents median values of validity coefficients.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 11 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Castillo Garzón MJ, Ortega Porcel FB, Ruiz Ruiz J. [Improvement of physical fitness as anti-aging intervention]. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;124:146–55. Spanish. - PubMed
    1. Taylor HL, Buskirk E, Henschel A. Maximal oxygen intake as an objective measure of cardio-respiratory performance. J Appl Physiol. 1955;8:73–80. - PubMed
    1. Kodama S, Saito K, Tanaka S, Maki M, Yachi Y, Asumi M, et al. Cardiorespiratory fitness as a quantitative predictor of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events in healthy men and women: A meta-analysis. JAMA. 2009;301:2024–35. 10.1001/jama.2009.681 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blair SN. Physical inactivity: The biggest public health problem of the 21st century. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43:1–2. - PubMed
    1. Ruiz JR, Castro-Pinero J, Artero EG, Ortega FB, Sjostrom M, Suni J, et al. Predictive validity of health-related fitness in youth: A systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43:909–23. 10.1136/bjsm.2008.056499 - DOI - PubMed

Grant support

Daniel Mayorga-Vega is an FPU [Formación del Profesorado Universitario] fellow; research was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (AP2010-5905). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Feedback