TY - JOUR
T1 - The relationships between internal and external measures of training load and intensity in team sports: A meta-analysis
AU - McLaren, Shaun
AU - MacPherson, Tom
AU - Coutts, A
AU - Hurst, Christopher
AU - Spears, Iain
AU - Weston, Matthew
PY - 2018/3/1
Y1 - 2018/3/1
N2 - BackgroundThe
associations between internal and external measures of training load
and intensity are important in understanding the training process and
the validity of specific internal measures.ObjectivesWe
aimed to provide meta-analytic estimates of the relationships, as
determined by a correlation coefficient, between internal and external
measures of load and intensity during team-sport training and
competition. A further aim was to examine the moderating effects of
training mode on these relationships.MethodsWe
searched six electronic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed,
MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL) for original research articles published
up to September 2017. A Boolean search phrase was created to include
search terms relevant to team-sport athletes (population; 37 keywords),
internal load (dependent variable; 35 keywords), and external load
(independent variable; 81 keywords). Articles were considered for
meta-analysis when a correlation coefficient describing the association
between at least one internal and one external measure of session load
or intensity, measured in the time or frequency domain, was obtained
from team-sport athletes during normal training or match-play (i.e.,
unstructured observational study). The final data sample included 122
estimates from 13 independent studies describing 15 unique relationships
between three internal and nine external measures of load and
intensity. This sample included 295 athletes and 10,418 individual
session observations. Internal measures were session ratings of
perceived exertion (sRPE), sRPE training load (sRPE-TL), and
heart-rate-derived training impulse (TRIMP). External measures were
total distance (TD), the distance covered at high and very high speeds
(HSRD ≥ 13.1–15.0 km h−1 and VHSRD ≥ 16.9–19.8 km h−1,
respectively), accelerometer load (AL), and the number of sustained
impacts (Impacts > 2–5 G). Distinct training modes were identified as
either mixed (reference condition), skills, metabolic, or
neuromuscular. Separate random effects meta-analyses were conducted for
each dataset (n = 15) to determine
the pooled relationships between internal and external measures of load
and intensity. The moderating effects of training mode were examined
using random-effects meta-regression for datasets with at least ten
estimates (n = 4). Magnitude-based inferences were used to interpret analyses outcomes.ResultsDuring all training modes combined, the external load relationships for sRPE-TL were possibly very large with TD [r = 0.79; 90% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.83], possibly large with AL (r = 0.63; 90% CI 0.54 to 0.70) and Impacts (r = 0.57; 90% CI 0.47 to 0.64), and likely moderate with HSRD (r = 0.47; 90% CI 0.32 to 0.59). The relationship between TRIMP and AL was possibly large (r = 0.54; 90% CI 0.40 to 0.66). All other relationships were unclear or not possible to infer (r range 0.17–0.74, n = 10 datasets). Between-estimate heterogeneity [standard deviations (SDs) representing unexplained variation; τ] in the pooled internal–external relationships were trivial to extremely large for sRPE (τ range = 0.00–0.47), small to large for sRPE-TL (τ range = 0.07–0.31), and trivial to moderate for TRIMP (τ range= 0.00–0.17).
The internal–external load relationships during mixed training were
possibly very large for sRPE-TL with TD (r = 0.82; 90% CI 0.75 to 0.87) and AL (r = 0.81; 90% CI 0.74 to 0.86), and TRIMP with AL (r = 0.72; 90% CI 0.55 to 0.84), and possibly large for sRPE-TL with HSRD (r = 0.65;
90% CI 0.44 to 0.80). A reduction in these correlation magnitudes was
evident for all other training modes (range of the change in r
when compared with mixed training − 0.08 to − 0.58), with these
differences being unclear to possibly large. Training mode explained
24–100% of the between-estimate variance in the internal–external load
relationships.ConclusionMeasures
of internal load derived from perceived exertion and heart rate show
consistently positive associations with running- and
accelerometer-derived external loads and intensity during team-sport
training and competition, but the magnitude and uncertainty of these
relationships are measure and training mode dependent.
AB - BackgroundThe
associations between internal and external measures of training load
and intensity are important in understanding the training process and
the validity of specific internal measures.ObjectivesWe
aimed to provide meta-analytic estimates of the relationships, as
determined by a correlation coefficient, between internal and external
measures of load and intensity during team-sport training and
competition. A further aim was to examine the moderating effects of
training mode on these relationships.MethodsWe
searched six electronic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed,
MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL) for original research articles published
up to September 2017. A Boolean search phrase was created to include
search terms relevant to team-sport athletes (population; 37 keywords),
internal load (dependent variable; 35 keywords), and external load
(independent variable; 81 keywords). Articles were considered for
meta-analysis when a correlation coefficient describing the association
between at least one internal and one external measure of session load
or intensity, measured in the time or frequency domain, was obtained
from team-sport athletes during normal training or match-play (i.e.,
unstructured observational study). The final data sample included 122
estimates from 13 independent studies describing 15 unique relationships
between three internal and nine external measures of load and
intensity. This sample included 295 athletes and 10,418 individual
session observations. Internal measures were session ratings of
perceived exertion (sRPE), sRPE training load (sRPE-TL), and
heart-rate-derived training impulse (TRIMP). External measures were
total distance (TD), the distance covered at high and very high speeds
(HSRD ≥ 13.1–15.0 km h−1 and VHSRD ≥ 16.9–19.8 km h−1,
respectively), accelerometer load (AL), and the number of sustained
impacts (Impacts > 2–5 G). Distinct training modes were identified as
either mixed (reference condition), skills, metabolic, or
neuromuscular. Separate random effects meta-analyses were conducted for
each dataset (n = 15) to determine
the pooled relationships between internal and external measures of load
and intensity. The moderating effects of training mode were examined
using random-effects meta-regression for datasets with at least ten
estimates (n = 4). Magnitude-based inferences were used to interpret analyses outcomes.ResultsDuring all training modes combined, the external load relationships for sRPE-TL were possibly very large with TD [r = 0.79; 90% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.83], possibly large with AL (r = 0.63; 90% CI 0.54 to 0.70) and Impacts (r = 0.57; 90% CI 0.47 to 0.64), and likely moderate with HSRD (r = 0.47; 90% CI 0.32 to 0.59). The relationship between TRIMP and AL was possibly large (r = 0.54; 90% CI 0.40 to 0.66). All other relationships were unclear or not possible to infer (r range 0.17–0.74, n = 10 datasets). Between-estimate heterogeneity [standard deviations (SDs) representing unexplained variation; τ] in the pooled internal–external relationships were trivial to extremely large for sRPE (τ range = 0.00–0.47), small to large for sRPE-TL (τ range = 0.07–0.31), and trivial to moderate for TRIMP (τ range= 0.00–0.17).
The internal–external load relationships during mixed training were
possibly very large for sRPE-TL with TD (r = 0.82; 90% CI 0.75 to 0.87) and AL (r = 0.81; 90% CI 0.74 to 0.86), and TRIMP with AL (r = 0.72; 90% CI 0.55 to 0.84), and possibly large for sRPE-TL with HSRD (r = 0.65;
90% CI 0.44 to 0.80). A reduction in these correlation magnitudes was
evident for all other training modes (range of the change in r
when compared with mixed training − 0.08 to − 0.58), with these
differences being unclear to possibly large. Training mode explained
24–100% of the between-estimate variance in the internal–external load
relationships.ConclusionMeasures
of internal load derived from perceived exertion and heart rate show
consistently positive associations with running- and
accelerometer-derived external loads and intensity during team-sport
training and competition, but the magnitude and uncertainty of these
relationships are measure and training mode dependent.
U2 - 10.1007/s40279-017-0830-z
DO - 10.1007/s40279-017-0830-z
M3 - Article
SN - 0112-1642
VL - 48
SP - 641
EP - 658
JO - Sports Medicine
JF - Sports Medicine
IS - 3
ER -