In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 1 as published. Some average values in Week 4 column (those with no significant change) have been lost and only standard deviations appear. The corrected Table 1 appears below.
Table 1
| Scale | Baseline week | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General stress | |||||
| 1. General stress | 1.01 ± 0.93 | 1.03 ± 1.08 | 1.25 ± 1.03 | 1.97 ± 1.68 | ns |
| 2. Emotional stress | 1.21 ± 0.90 | 1.13 ± 1.10 | 1.28 ± 0.88 | 2.09 ± 1.58 | ns |
| 3. Social stress | 1.29 ± 0.82 | 1.11 ± 0.94 | 1.33 ± 0.91 | 2.25± 1.38b | p < 0.05 |
| 4. Conflicts/pressure | 1.65 ± 0.90 | 1.61 ± 0.87 | 1.93 ± 0.71 | 2.59± 1.19b | p < 0.05 |
| 5. Fatigue | 1.74 ± 1.19 | 1.61 ± 1.11 | 2.07± 1.23b | 2.69± 1.50b | p < 0.05 |
| 6. Lack of energy | 1.81 ± 0.82 | 1.53 ± 0.69 | 1.70 ± 0.73 | 1.75 ± 0.53 | ns |
| 7. Physical complaints | 1.44 ± 0.75 | 1.52 ± 0.83 | 1.68 ± 0.64 | 1.91± 0.58a | p < 0.05 |
| General recovery | |||||
| 8. Success | 3.11 ± 0.79 | 2.75 ± 1.25 | 2.55 ± 0.92 | 2.75 ± 0.88 | ns |
| 9. Social recovery | 3.57 ± 1.36 | 3.42 ± 1.35 | 3.47 ± 1.31 | 2.50 ± 1.20 | ns |
| 10. Physical recovery | 3.18 ± 1.18 | 3.08 ± 1.08 | 2.83 ± 1.07 | 2.34 ± 1.18 | ns |
| 11. General well-being | 3.96 ± 1.32 | 3.94 ± 1.31 | 3.93 ± 1.27 | 2.69± 1.27a | p < 0.05 |
| 12. Sleep quality | 4.00 ± 1.08 | 4.53± 0.90a | 4.15 ± 1.13 | 3.31 ± 1.46 | p < 0.05 |
| Sport stress | |||||
| 13. Disturbed breaks | 1.47 ± 0.82 | 1.09 ± 0.50 | 1.63± 0.93b | 1.94± 0.94b | p < 0.05 |
| 14. Emotional exhaustion | 1.07 ± 1.36 | 1.03 ± 1.14 | 1.30 ± 1.31 | 1.69 ± 1.93 | ns |
| 15. Injury | 2.13 ± 0.98 | 2.19 ± 1.03 | 2.03± 0.92b | 1.63 ± 0.82 | p < 0.05 |
| Sport recovery | |||||
| 16. Being in shape | 3.51 ± 1.11 | 3.39 ± 1.24 | 3.00 ± 1.09 | 2.84 ± 0.88 | ns |
| 17. Personal accomplishments | 3.19 ± 0.99 | 2.88 ± 1.14 | 2.50± 1.29a | 2.22± 1.48a | p < 0.05 |
| 18. Self-efficacy | 3.44 ± 0.76 | 3.41 ± 0.98 | 3.03 ± 1.00 | 3.25 ± 0.96 | ns |
| 19. Self-regulation | 2.31 ± 0.83 | 2.47 ± 0.88 | 2.37 ± 0.94 | 3.44± 1.24b | p < 0.05 |
Average scores (mean ± SD) of the Recovery-Stress Questionnaire for Athletes (RESTQ-Sport) scales during the 4-week training period.
p < 0.05 is significantly different from baseline week.
p < 0.05 is significantly different from week 2. ns, non-significant. The statistical differences (p < 0.05) are shown in bold.
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher's Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
training monitoring, intensity, duration, internal load, external load, exercise prescription, session RPE
Citation
Pind R, Hofmann P, Mäestu E, Vahtra E, Purge P and Mäestu J (2022) Corrigendum: Increases in RPE Rating Predict Fatigue Accumulation Without Changes in Heart Rate Zone Distribution After 4-Week Low-Intensity High-Volume Training Period in High-Level Rowers. Front. Physiol. 13:834667. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2022.834667
Received
13 December 2021
Accepted
10 January 2022
Published
31 January 2022
Volume
13 - 2022
Edited and reviewed by
Giuseppe D'Antona, University of Pavia, Italy
Updates
Copyright
© 2022 Pind, Hofmann, Mäestu, Vahtra, Purge and Mäestu.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Rasmus Pind rasmus.pind@ut.ee
This article was submitted to Exercise Physiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physiology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.