Study note • PMID 11422888
Inspiratory muscle performance in endurance athletes and sedentary subjects.
How to use this page
This note summarizes one study record. Check the participants, methods, results, and limitations before applying it to training.
- • Design signal: controlled study.
- • Population relevance: athlete/trained context.
- • Consistency: single-study evidence.
- • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.
ELI5
In plain language
The aim of this study was to determine whether whole-body endurance training is associated with increased respiratory muscle strength and endurance. (controlled study; runners).
The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time to exhaustion under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.
Takeaways
What the abstract suggests
- • Study question: The aim of this study was to determine whether whole-body endurance training is associated with increased respiratory muscle strength and endurance.
- • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time to exhaustion under the tested conditions.
- • Population: runners.
- • Protocol cues: abstract may omit dose/timing; use the full paper to replicate accurately.
Protocol
Protocol (as reported)
- • Intervention/exposure: respiratory, breathing (vs comparison group).
- • Dose/time/duration: abstract doesn’t include enough detail; use the full paper’s methods section.
- • Outcomes: Time to exhaustion.
- • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.
Fit
Who it may help, and who should be cautious
Who it helps
- • Athletes similar to the study population (runners) working on breathing.
- • Athletes who can measure Time to exhaustion with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.
Who should be cautious
- • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
- • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.
Methods
What the study actually did
- • Design: controlled study.
- • Population: runners.
- • Comparator: comparison group.
- • Outcomes measured: Time to exhaustion.
- • Source: PubMed PMID 11422888 (2001) — Respirology (Carlton, Vic.).
Results excerpt
What the abstract reports
“PImax was similar between the two groups of subjects but the maximum threshold pressure achieved was greater in marathon runners (90 +/- 8 vs 78 +/- 10% of PImax, respectively, mean +/- SD, P < 0.05).”
Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.
Limits
Limitations and bias
- • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
- • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
- • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
- • This is performance information, not medical advice.
Adaptive AI coach for iPhone
Meet your adaptive AI coach.
Tell your coach what you are training for. It builds the plan, follows the work you complete, and adapts upcoming training when recovery, your schedule, or real life changes.
Keep going
Performance Science Lab
Research summaries for endurance athletes, with study context, practical protocols, and clear limitations.
Breathing performance research
Breathing interventions can help if they reduce wasted effort and improve tolerance at high work rates.
Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol
Evidence-informed protocol: Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol. Practical steps, who it helps, and what to watch out for.