Document Type

Article

Publication Date

9-2020

Publication Title

Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness

Volume

18

Abstract

Background

This study examined the validity of the FitnessGram® criterion-reference cut-points for cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) based on two samples of US adolescents (aged 12–15 years). This study also established the CRF cut-points for metabolically healthy weight status based on a recent national fitness survey for the purposes of cross-validating with pre-existing cut-points including FitnessGram.

Methods

Two cross-sectional data from the 2003–2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (n = 378) and 2012 NHANES National Youth Fitness Survey (NNYFS) (n = 451) were used. CRF (estimated V˙" role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: normal; font-size: 16.2px; word-spacing: normal; overflow-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; position: relative;">V˙O2max in mL/kg/min) was estimated from a submaximal exercise test. CRF categories based on FitnessGram cut-points, a clustered cardiometabolic risk factors score and weight status were used. A series of Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were conducted to identify age- and sex-specific CRF cut-points that were optimal for metabolically healthy weight status.

Results

Based on FitnessGram cut-points, having high risk CRF, but not low risk CRF, was associated with high cardiometabolic risk (OR = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.14–8.79) and unhealthy weight status (OR = 5.81, 95% CI = 3.49–9.68). The optimal CRF cut-points for 12-13-year-olds and 14-15-year-olds were 40 and 43 mL/kg/min in males and 39 and 34 mL/kg/min in females, respectively. Compared to meeting new CRF cut-points, not meeting new CRF cut-points was associated with higher odds of showing high cardiometabolic risk (OR = 2.91, 95% CI = 1.47–5.77) and metabolically unhealthy weight status (OR = 4.47, 95% CI = 2.83–7.05).

Conclusion

FitnessGram CRF cut-point itself has rarely been scrutinized in previous literature. Our findings provide partial support for FitnessGram based on two samples of US adolescents. CRF cut-points established in this study supports international criterion-referenced cut-points as well as FitnessGram cut-points only for males. FitnessGram should be continuously monitored and scrutinized using different samples.

Issue

3

First Page

129

Last Page

135

DOI

10.1016/j.jesf.2020.04.002

ISSN

1728-869X

Download

Share

COinS