Volunteers required for research study

mushykeogh

Hi all, hope i can post this here, Im completing my Msc in Exercise Physiology and i am looking for some help.

If you are Male, aged 18-30 years and a competitive Cyclist or Triathlete, would you like to volunteer to take part in a series of physiological trials?

Requirements
Attend the Laboratory at Trinity College Dublin on 7 separate occasions. One graded incremental cycle test, 2 sprint endurance cycles and 4 time trial cycles of 40 km.

Benefits for volunteers
Free graded incremental testing,! Included in the data will be VO2 max, max power output at Vo2 max, blood lactate measurement at incremented workloads, heart rate measurement at incremented workloads, lactate threshold, respiratory exchange ratio, pulmonary ventilation and ventilatory equivalent for oxygen. Height, weight, body fat percentage, BMI, lung function tests and blood samples will also be taken to give a global account of the participants current physical status for their sport. Advice will be given regarding training from all the respective data which will help for the training and competition preparation.

Full physical examination by a qualified doctor free of charge. This is to screen if the volunteer is fit for maximal testing.

Any questions you can dm me or email keoghc6@tcd.ie.

Thanks

Ciaran

Beasty

Why restrict such research to under 30s? A very large number of highy competitive cyclists are in their 30s and 40s (a lot of the top cyclists in the country are over 30), and I know plenty competing at a very high level in their 50s and 60s (some of whom can do 40k TTs in less than an hour). There are also plenty of competitive female cyclists out there

I suspect you will struggle to find enough males in the 18-30 category prepared to do 4 x 40km TTs for you

Redmond101

I'm not a competiting cyclist or triathlete! But am training for next session to compete.

Training would consist of gym mixture of resistance training and interval running, 5 days a week and cycling 3 times a week.

Not ideal candidate but if you need to make up the numbers can participate

leftism

Beasty wrote: »

Why restrict such research to under 30s? A very large number of highy competitive cyclists are in their 30s and 40s (a lot of the top cyclists in the country are over 30), and I know plenty competing at a very high level in their 50s and 60s (some of whom can do 40k TTs in less than an hour). There are also plenty of competitive female cyclists out there

I suspect you will struggle to find enough males in the 18-30 category prepared to do 4 x 40km TTs for you

The long and short of it is that there is a slightly higher risk of cardiac arrest when running maximal incremental tests on subjects over 40 years old. As a result, they require a more thorough medical screening process and often a referral to a cardiologist (just to cover the lab's arse). Including such participants in your study makes it more difficult to gain ethical approval from the Health Sciences faculty. The exclusion of female subjects is for basically the same reason; it complicates things with regards to ethical approval. In addition, the homogenaeity of your group data could suffer if you have large variations in age, gender, physical fitness etc.

Its definitely not fair, but thems the rules.

On a sidenote, having ridden a TT against Beasty i would personally vouch that he would tear the legs off most 20 year old subjects i've had in for testing. Unfortunately there is no "Beasty clause" when it comes to writing up inclusion criteria in the methodology section of your thesis...

kumate_champ07

Im interested. When does it begin?

Nwm2

Beasty wrote: »

I suspect you will struggle to find enough males in the 18-30 category prepared to do 4 x 40km TTs for you

Better than 4 x tests to exhaustion!

Beasty

There must be some mileage in seeing how far you can push a 50 year old cyclist before his heart gives out:D

Seriously though, I understand the "insurance-type" issues, but would suggest that if the OP could at least go up to 40 there will probably be a much higher population of potential volunteers

Having saud that, it's a very big ask for someone to commit to 4 x 40km TTs, particularly when they may either be competing or training for competition - not very many riders will complete this many over the course of a year, and TTs do tend to attract a higher proportion of the older generations of cyclists

Eamonnator

If I lie(a lot) about my age, will you let me in???

Beasty

Nwm2 wrote: »

Better than 4 x tests to exhaustion!

A 40km TT done properely is a test to exhaustion, but the pain should be worse and last a lot longer;)

kennyb3

I was going to e mail personally but may as well ask some questions here as no doubt the response will be of use to a number of people:

1. Any idea of dates and times re the 7 attendances? I assume weekends are possible? Is there a degree of flexibility or is it 7 set dates?

2. Is it okay to train away as normal in between or is there any rest days/down time required prior to the tests?

Redmond101

Forgot to note that I will be free over the next 2 months as I am on college break! Definatley interested

Jawgap

What's the study trying to prove - that ageism and sexism is alive and well in sports testing?:)

I never understand these arbitrary age limits - I could weight 28 stone, be aged 25 and have barely put my arse on a bike and get on to the study, but if you're 38, lean as a greyhound and been cylcing for years, you're out???? (btw - I'm not lean, I'm not 38, but I've done a bit of cycling).

Put it another way, why is someone aged 29 years and 364 days allowed into the study, but someone aged 30 years and one day not?

finally, a sincere good luck with your work.

Nwm2

Jawgap wrote: »

What's the study trying to prove - that ageism and sexism is alive and well in sports testing?:)

I never understand these arbitrary age limits - I could weight 28 stone, be aged 25 and have barely put my arse on a bike and get on to the study, but if you're 38, lean as a greyhound and been cylcing for years, you're out???? (btw - I'm not lean, I'm not 38, but I've done a bit of cycling).

Put it another way, why is someone aged 29 years and 364 days allowed into the study, but someone aged 30 years and one day not?

finally, a sincere good luck with your work.

He wants competitive cyclists or triathletes, who have to pass a medical exam, so no you're not getting in at 28 stone.

Lumen

Grumpy old men need not apply.

mushykeogh

Thanks for all the replies, i will respond to all the queries later this evening!

ciaran

Jawgap

Nwm2 wrote: »

He wants competitive cyclists or triathletes, who have to pass a medical exam, so no you're not getting in at 28 stone.

Define competitive?

On the basis of the criteria supplied "fat lad" Thor Houshovd wouldn't be eligible (83kg and 33 years old):)

The 28 stone was example of exaggeration used for illustration - the point was that the criteria being used for selection of individuals are subjective and arbitrary, and consequently likely to introduce a potential bias into the sample.

Probably depends on the study's objective, but I would have thought it would be easy enough to come up with something more scientific for identifying subjects?

seamus

Jawgap wrote: »

What's the study trying to prove - that ageism and sexism is alive and well in sports testing?:)

I never understand these arbitrary age limits - I could weight 28 stone, be aged 25 and have barely put my arse on a bike and get on to the study, but if you're 38, lean as a greyhound and been cylcing for years, you're out???? (btw - I'm not lean, I'm not 38, but I've done a bit of cycling).

Put it another way, why is someone aged 29 years and 364 days allowed into the study, but someone aged 30 years and one day not?

That depends on what's being tested, surely?

In this case by adding in certain constraints about the participants - age & activity level - this means you don't necessarily have to correct the data for other factors. For instance, if you were charting VO2max & HRmax for the participants, you would have to add in some correction algorithms to take account of the participants' ages.
In this case the study may be able to declare that, "Because all of the participants are 30 or under, we decided that no age-related corrections need to be applied to the data.

This isn't an offer of free stuff. It's a scientific test. Scientific tests on occasion need to be as discriminatory as possible to get the most accurate results.

How can you claim that there will be biase in the sample when you've no idea what's being tested in the first place?

QueensGael

So what's the reason for not having women in your test group? Are *all* women susceptible to cardiac arrest, or is it the generic "you might be pregnant" rule?

Nwm2

Jawgap wrote: »

Define competitive?

On the basis of the criteria supplied "fat lad" Thor Houshovd wouldn't be eligible (83kg and 33 years old):)

The 28 stone was example of exaggeration used for illustration - the point was that the criteria being used for selection of individuals are subjective and arbitrary, and consequently likely to introduce a potential bias into the sample.

Probably depends on the study's objective, but I would have thought it would be easy enough to come up with something more scientific for identifying subjects?

Jaysus Jawgap, you're digging a great big hole for yourself! I don't know why everyone is suddenly a sports scientist/statistician (maybe you are, I don't know) and wants to advise the OP of where he's going wrong. Especially with absoutely no information about what the study is about.

I'd guess Thor Hushovd is the last person the OP would want in his study - he'll be so different from the other 'competitive cyclists or triathletes' that will sign up that he will just introduce noise.

Depending on the goals of the study, he'll probably try to make the subjects as similar as possible, if possible, in order to increase his statistical power (ie reducing the noise in the signal to noise ratio). On the downside, his conclusions will only apply to the specific subsection of the population he sampled from.

So therefore these small studies usually state 'competitive male cyclists' or 'moderately trained male cyclists' or 'highly trained male cyclists' or whatever, it will give their average age with a +/- to indicate the range and the conclusions apply to that subgroup only.

Not sexist or ageist FFS, as some seem to think.

abcdggs

I would be interested in helping out with this. I'm also interested to find out when the 7 tests would be though

sled driver

Nwm2 wrote: »

Jaysus Jawgap, you're digging a great big hole for yourself! I don't know why everyone is suddenly a sports scientist/statistician (maybe you are, I don't know) and wants to advise the OP of where he's going wrong. Especially with absoutely no information about what the study is about.

I'd guess Thor Hushovd is the last person the OP would want in his study - he'll be so different from the other 'competitive cyclists or triathletes' that will sign up that he will just introduce noise.

Depending on the goals of the study, he'll probably try to make the subjects as similar as possible, if possible, in order to increase his statistical power (ie reducing the noise in the signal to noise ratio). On the downside, his conclusions will only apply to the specific subsection of the population he sampled from.

So therefore these small studies usually state 'competitive male cyclists' or 'moderately trained male cyclists' or 'highly trained male cyclists' or whatever, it will give their average age with a +/- to indicate the range and the conclusions apply to that subgroup only.

Not sexist or ageist FFS, as some seem to think.

Here's a thought!!

Maybe his MSc is called "The exercise physiology of competitive male cyclists/triathletes in the 18 to 30 age bracket"

So regardless of your ability on the bike/fitness levels, once you're over the age of 30 or of the opposite gender, then you're clearly outside the parameters or the terms of reference that have been defined for the project.

Maybe he should have just gone with MAMILs (and the female equivalent ??) need not apply.

leftism

QueensGael wrote: »

So what's the reason for not having women in your test group? Are *all* women susceptible to cardiac arrest, or is it the generic "you might be pregnant" rule?

Probably the pregnancy thing. But repeat testing with female athlete groups can be very tricky in general because of the hormonal variations on a monthly basis. That can play havoc with certain measured variables although i'm not entirely sure whats being measured in this study.

BTH

I'm a fit for your criteria, but I don't know if trying to fit 4 40km TT in an already very busy summer is really a good idea. Triathlon or Run race each of the next 6 weekends is probably enough!

pprendeville

Count me in pendin answers to questions.

Beasty

pprendeville wrote: »

Count me in pendin answers to questions.

But you're technically in excess of 30

Btw, I'm not particularly concerned about any "ageist" or "sexist" issues. I simply do not believe there will be enough "volunteers" in the 18-30 male category of adequate standard who will be prepared to commit to something like this. I would consequently question the credibility of any results.

Anyway, at present I accept this could be a bit speculative as the OP has not given us a full idea of what he is looking to achieve

chakattack

I'm interested but how flexible are the testing times?

Evenings, weekends, 9-5?

Is the 40k TT on the road or in the lab? Might be hard to stay motivated to suffer for an hour in the lab out of competition.

Jawgap

Nwm2 wrote: »

Jaysus Jawgap, you're digging a great big hole for yourself! I don't know why everyone is suddenly a sports scientist/statistician (maybe you are, I don't know) and wants to advise the OP of where he's going wrong. Especially with absoutely no information about what the study is about.

I'd guess Thor Hushovd is the last person the OP would want in his study - he'll be so different from the other 'competitive cyclists or triathletes' that will sign up that he will just introduce noise.

Depending on the goals of the study, he'll probably try to make the subjects as similar as possible, if possible, in order to increase his statistical power (ie reducing the noise in the signal to noise ratio). On the downside, his conclusions will only apply to the specific subsection of the population he sampled from.

So therefore these small studies usually state 'competitive male cyclists' or 'moderately trained male cyclists' or 'highly trained male cyclists' or whatever, it will give their average age with a +/- to indicate the range and the conclusions apply to that subgroup only.

Not sexist or ageist FFS, as some seem to think.

You're right - that's why I've stopped digging......:)

BTH

Beasty wrote: »

But you're technically in excess of 30

Was going to say this. Not sure I'd want to be compared alongside a provincial champ!!

pprendeville

Beasty wrote: »

But you're technically in excess of 30

Btw, I'm not particularly concerned about any "ageist" or "sexist" issues. I simply do not believe there will be enough "volunteers" in the 18-30 male category of adequate standard who will be prepared to commit to something like this. I would consequently question the credibility of any results.

Anyway, at present I accept this could be a bit speculative as the OP has not given us a full idea of what he is looking to achieve

How do you deduce I'm in excess of 30?

Also got lucky with that win last wk. Wouldn't read into it that much.

Actually do we need to bring our own bike for the test. If we do I'm in a spot of bother.

Beasty

pprendeville wrote: »

How do you deduce I'm in excess of 30?

You will be by the time this testing is done;)

30 years and 1 day old is in excess of 30 in my book ...

Now getting even more technical, the way the age categorisations work in cycling is that during a calendar year you are considered your age at the end of that year. Hence you can race with the vets when you are only 39 so long as you turn 40 during the same calendar year

(I am guessing it works the other way round for juniors)

pprendeville

Beasty wrote: »

You will be by the time this testing is done;)

30 years and 1 day old is in excess of 30 in my book ...

Now getting even more technical, the way the age categorisations work in cycling is that during a calendar year you are considered your age at the end of that year. Hence you can race with the vets when you are only 39 so long as you turn 40 during the same calendar year

(I am guessing it works the other way round for juniors)

I'll be 29 yrs and 1 day. My maths aain't great but my brain keeps giving me 29 when I subtract 1982 from 2011.

Beasty

pprendeville wrote: »

I'll be 29 yrs and 1 day. My maths aain't great but my brain keeps giving me 29 when I subtract 1982 from 2011.

Not quite what you said here:

pprendeville wrote: »

Taking manwithaplan's line here and saying life starts at 30 (for a cyclist anyway). My birthday coming up in just over a week so this was an unexpected early present.

However I accept you know a bit more about this than me:D

mushykeogh

First of all, thanks to the mods for letting my post stay up in this section.
To answer a few queries:

leftism wrote: »

Including such participants in your study makes it more difficult to gain ethical approval from the Health Sciences faculty. The exclusion of female subjects is for basically the same reason; it complicates things with regards to ethical approval. In addition, the homogenaeity of your group data could suffer if you have large variations in age, gender, physical fitness etc.

Its definitely not fair, but thems the rules.

Nail on the head there in regards to ethics approval and homogeneity. However, the primary reason for the age and sex criteria is that i am trying to fill some gaps in the research. The study i am closely following used my set criteria. Similar protocol, similar subjects. but a slight change in the glycogen status of the subjects. Not sexist, not ageist, just trying to conduct good research on a well respected peer reviewed topic.

Jawgap wrote: »

What's the study trying to prove - that ageism and sexism is alive and well in sports testing?:)

Im researching the role of carbohydrate mouth rinse on time trial performance in a glycogen depleted and non glycogen depleted state.

It would be infinitely easier for me to have an age range of 18-50, male and female, competitive and untrained. However, ethics approval would be a major problem and i would have far too many variables in my study to gather meaningful results!

More detail on the study is available herehttp://www.cksportsconditioning.org/#/research/4550468263

I can e mail people the same information sheet if they wish.
Aiming to start testing in 3 weeks time. I will try to be as flexible as possible with testing times but it is important to note that the glycogen depletion test will need to be performed in late afternoon followed by the time trial the following morning.

Thanks to everyone who has emailed or sent me dm on here, i will have replied to everyone by 9 am tomorrow morning.

pprendeville

Beasty wrote: »

Not quite what you said here:


However I accept you know a bit more about this than me:D

Ah yes well there's a perfectly logical reason why I wrote that but right now I can't think of it. Are these my feet?

Life starts at 30-1. Yes, that's it I forgot to subtract the 1.

mushykeogh

chakattack wrote: »

I'm interested but how flexible are the testing times?

Evenings, weekends, 9-5?

Is the 40k TT on the road or in the lab? Might be hard to stay motivated to suffer for an hour in the lab out of competition.

Lab based im afraid! Im trying to stretch the hours of testing as far as they will let me!

mushykeogh

kennyb3 wrote: »

I was going to e mail personally but may as well ask some questions here as no doubt the response will be of use to a number of people:

1. Any idea of dates and times re the 7 attendances? I assume weekends are possible? Is there a degree of flexibility or is it 7 set dates?

2. Is it okay to train away as normal in between or is there any rest days/down time required prior to the tests?

1. hope to start testing in 2-3 weeks. Weekends not likely at the moment but im trying to arrange something. There is some degree of flexibility for some of the tests. However, one of the protocols will involve an evening test followed by a morning test the next day. This will be repeated twice.

2. No physical exercise 24 hours before any test.

Any other questions just let me know.

Redmond101

How many people are you looking for to do the study?

mushykeogh

Redmond101 wrote: »

How many people are you looking for to do the study?

As many as i can get. I cant envisage a situation where i am turning away people!

ciaran

amjon.

I would have killed to do this test. Injured at the moment but if I get back on the bike soon I'd definitely be a willing participant!

kennyb3

No weekends so thats me out anyway.

nomadic

I was contemplating this but I'd rather pay to get the tests done than have to do 2 glycogen depleted 40km TT's.

abcdggs

Afraid the no exercise 24 hr prior puts me out, best of luck anyway

chakattack

nomadic wrote: »

I was contemplating this but I'd rather pay to get the tests done than have to do 2 glycogen depleted 40km TT's.

I'm out because I can't do weekday mornings. Might be ok to do Friday evening/saturday morning. Not too keen on a glycogen-less 40k TT either to be honest, a flat out bonk wouldn't do much for my fitness

I'd give it a go in the off season but doubt you want to wait until sept/oct.

StudentC

leftism wrote: »

The exclusion of female subjects is for basically the same reason; it complicates things with regards to ethical approval. QUOTE]


Hi Leftism / mushykeogh

Just interested in this point, apolgies for the off-topic question.

What you say about homogeneity about the group makes sense, and obviously the hormonal variation aspect, depending on what your outcome measures are.

But excluding these methadological issues, is it harder to get ethics in Trinity for female volunteers than males? Not trying to be picky, just interested - here (UCD) I can't see myself having a harder time getting ethics for female particpants.

kumate_champ07

I think I might have to pull out, the no exercise 24hrs pre testing will interfer with my own training. If it was late september I could probably do it

mushykeogh

StudentC wrote: »

But excluding these methadological issues, is it harder to get ethics in Trinity for female volunteers than males? Not trying to be picky, just interested - here (UCD) I can't see myself having a harder time getting ethics for female particpants.

Not harder as such, more detail required on the ethics form when submitting which may lead to a delay. Pregnancy tests and detailed info about allowable contraceptives etc need to be included i think.

A big thanks to everyone who has replied, it has been of monumental assistance being able to post here. Even if you cant commit yourself, if you could spread the word that would be brilliant.

All going well and if anyone is interested in a few months i can return and present the findings to the boards forum for discussion.

Ciaran

pprendeville

what's the story with this? anyone get called?