Abstract
This study cross-validated statistical models for prediction of peak oxygen consumption using ratings of perceived exertion from the Adult OMNI Cycle Scale of Perceived Exertion. 74 participants (men: n=36; women: n=38) completed a graded cycle exercise test. Ratings of perceived exertion for the overall body, legs, and chest/breathing were recorded each test stage and entered into previously developed 3-stage peak oxygen consumption prediction models. There were no significant differences (p>0.05) between measured and predicted peak oxygen consumption from ratings of perceived exertion for the overall body, legs, and chest/breathing within men (mean±standard deviation: 3.16±0.52 vs. 2.92±0.33 vs. 2.90±0.29 vs. 2.90±0.26 L·min(-1)) and women (2.17±0.29 vs. 2.02±0.22 vs. 2.03±0.19 vs. 2.01±0.19 L·min(-1)) participants. Previously developed statistical models for prediction of peak oxygen consumption based on subpeak OMNI ratings of perceived exertion responses were similar to measured peak oxygen consumption in a separate group of participants. These findings provide practical implications for the use of the original statistical models in standard health-fitness settings.