Key result
The 208 - 0.7(age) equation closely predicted mean maximal heart rate in children (absolute difference 8 ± 5 bpm vs measured), but individual variation remained apparent.
Why the study?
Do HRmax prediction equations accurately predict measured HRmax in children and adolescents?
Cross-Sectional (n=52)
Do HRmax prediction equations accurately predict measured HRmax in children and adolescents?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The 208 - 0.7(age) equation can closely predict mean HRmax in children, though individual variation remains.
In this study, we compared measured maximal heart rate (HRmax) to two different HRmax prediction equations [220 — age and 208 — 0.7(age)] in 52 children ages 7-17 years. We determined the relationship of chronological age, maturational age, and resting HR to measured HRmax and assessed seated resting HR and HRmax during a graded exercise test. Maturational age was calculated as the maturity offset in years from the estimated age at peak height velocity. Measured HRmax was 201 ± 10 bpm, whereas predicted HRmax ranged from 199 to 208 bpm. Measured HRmax and the predicted value from the 208 — 0.7(age) prediction were similar but lower (p < .05) than the 220 — age prediction. Absolute differences between measured and predicted HRmax were 8 ± 5 and 10 ± 8 bpm for the 208 — 0.7 (age) and 220 — age equations, respectively, and were greater than zero (p < .05). Regression equations using resting HR and maturity offset or chronological age significantly predicted HRmax, although the R2 < .30 and the standard error of estimation (8.2-8.5) limits the accuracy. The 208 — 0.7(age) equation can closely predict mean HRmax in children, but individual variation is still apparent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mahon et al. (2010) reported a cross-sectional. 208 - 0.7(age) prediction equation vs. 220 - age prediction equation was evaluated on Absolute difference between measured and predicted maximal heart rate (p=< .05). The 208 - 0.7(age) equation closely predicted mean maximal heart rate in children (absolute difference 8 ± 5 bpm vs measured), but individual variation remained apparent.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: