Is it all for naught? What does mathematical coupling mean for acute:chronic workload ratios?
Editorial
Article Title | Is it all for naught? What does mathematical coupling mean for acute:chronic workload ratios? |
---|---|
ERA Journal ID | 9744 |
Article Category | Editorial |
Authors | Wendt, Johann (Author) and Gabbett, Tim (Author) |
Journal Title | British Journal of Sports Medicine |
Journal Citation | 53 (16), pp. 988-990 |
Number of Pages | 3 |
Year | 2018 |
Publisher | BMJ |
Place of Publication | United Kingdom |
ISSN | 0306-3674 |
1473-0480 | |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098925 |
Web Address (URL) | https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2018/05/28/bjsports-2017-098925 |
Abstract | Traditional calculations of the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) are ‘mathematically coupled’, as the most recent week is included in estimates of both the acute and chronic workloads. As Lolli and colleagues rightly point out, this induces a spurious correlation between the acute and chronic loads of ~0.50 (r=0.52 in their simulated data of 1000 athletes).1 They suggest that the simplest solution is to use uncoupled ACWRs (where the acute load is not part of the chronic load) instead. |
Keywords | mathematical coupling; acute:chronic workload ratios |
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020 | 420799. Sports science and exercise not elsewhere classified |
Public Notes | Files associated with this item cannot be displayed due to copyright restrictions. |
Byline Affiliations | University of British Columbia, Canada |
Institute for Resilient Regions | |
Institution of Origin | University of Southern Queensland |
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q53y9/is-it-all-for-naught-what-does-mathematical-coupling-mean-for-acute-chronic-workload-ratios
191
total views11
total downloads1
views this month0
downloads this month