Scholarlink

<p>In order to avoid cost-intensive laboratory-based test procedures, test systems based on field tests are used for health and fitness assessments in schools. For measuring cardiovascular endurance, one method frequently used is the 6‑min run (6MR). The test was carried out at three time points on three different running tracks (T1-6MR-9 × 18: rectangle = 9 × 18 m, T2-6MR-9 × 6: rectangle = 9 × 6 m, T3-6MR-400 = ellipse = 400 m), and the differences in the results were assessed. Significant differences (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) in total distance running were found between the rectangular running tracks (T1-6MR-9 × 18 = 1295 m [± 96] and T2-6MR-9 × 6 = 1297 m [± 101]) in the sports hall and the elliptical running track outdoors (T3-6MR-400 = 1362 m [± 126]). No differences (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.99) were found between the geometrically rectangular running tracks (T1-6MR-9 × 18 and T2-6MR-9 × 6) in the sports hall. These results indicate that existing reference values for the 6MR can also be used for assessment if the running test is conducted in sports halls with a&#xa0;minimum size of 9 × 6 m.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparability of Modified and Standardized Test Conditions for the 6-Min Run

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月25日

查看全文
  • Gerald Jarnig,
  • Reinhold Kerbl,
  • Christoph Rottensteiner,
  • Mireille N. M. van Poppel

摘要

In order to avoid cost-intensive laboratory-based test procedures, test systems based on field tests are used for health and fitness assessments in schools. For measuring cardiovascular endurance, one method frequently used is the 6‑min run (6MR). The test was carried out at three time points on three different running tracks (T1-6MR-9 × 18: rectangle = 9 × 18 m, T2-6MR-9 × 6: rectangle = 9 × 6 m, T3-6MR-400 = ellipse = 400 m), and the differences in the results were assessed. Significant differences (p < 0.001) in total distance running were found between the rectangular running tracks (T1-6MR-9 × 18 = 1295 m [± 96] and T2-6MR-9 × 6 = 1297 m [± 101]) in the sports hall and the elliptical running track outdoors (T3-6MR-400 = 1362 m [± 126]). No differences (p > 0.99) were found between the geometrically rectangular running tracks (T1-6MR-9 × 18 and T2-6MR-9 × 6) in the sports hall. These results indicate that existing reference values for the 6MR can also be used for assessment if the running test is conducted in sports halls with a minimum size of 9 × 6 m.