A large number of power meters have become commercially available during the last decades to provide power output (PO) measurement. Some of these power meters were evaluated for validity in the literature. This study aimed to perform a review of the available literature on the validity of cycling power meters. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar have been explored with PRISMA methodology. A total of 74 studies have been extracted for the reviewing process. Validity is a general quality of the measurement determined by the assessment of different metrological properties: Accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness. Accuracy was most often studied from the metrological property (74 studies). Reproducibility was the second most studied (40 studies) property. Finally, repeatability, sensitivity, and robustness were considerably less studied with only 7, 5, and 5 studies, respectively. The SRM power meter is the most used as a gold standard in the studies. Moreover, the number of participants was very different among them, from 0 (when using a calibration rig) to 56 participants. The PO tested was up to 1700 W, whereas the pedalling cadence ranged between 40 and 180 rpm, including submaximal and maximal exercises. Other exercise conditions were tested, such as torque, position, temperature, and vibrations. This review provides some caveats and recommendations when testing the validity of a cycling power meter, including all of the metrological properties (accuracy, sensitivity, repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness) and some exercise conditions (PO range, sprint, pedalling cadence, torque, position, participant, temperature, vibration, and field test).

This paper aims to provide a review of the electrically assisted bicycles (also known as e-bikes) used for recovery of the rider’s physical and physiological information, monitoring of their health state, and adjusting the “medical” assistance accordingly. E-bikes have proven to be an excellent way to do physical activity while commuting, thus improving the user’s health and reducing air pollutant emissions. Such devices can also be seen as the first step to help unhealthy sedentary people to start exercising with reduced strain. Based on this analysis, the need to have e-bikes with artificial intelligence (AI) systems that recover and processe a large amount of data is discussed in depth. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used to complete the relevant papers’ search and selection in this systematic review.

This study investigated biomechanical differences between successful and unsuccessful jumps during a pole vault competition. Two hundred and seven pairs of successful and unsuccessful jumps at the same height were analysed. Participants included male and female athletes of three different age groups with bar height clearances ranging from 2.81 to 5.91 m. Run-up parameters were collected using an Optojump Next system and a Stalker Pro II radar gun. A 2D kinematical analysis was conducted to obtain selected parameters of the take-off. Only trivial and small differences were found between successful and unsuccessful jumps. The speed at last touchdown showed a significant small difference between successful and unsuccessful jumps, as the greater speed at take-off (+0.15 m/s) was observed at successful jumps compared to unsuccessful jumps. Furthermore, female athletes showed a significant small difference in horizontal hand–foot distance between successful jumps and unsuccessful jumps (+0.05 m and +0.06 m at pole plant and take-off, respectively). The results suggest that pole vaulters should produce a fast run-up and avoid a decrease in speed before take-off. Small adjustments in the take-off posture might increase the transfer of energy from the athlete to the pole and thus an improvement concerning the height of bar clearance.