The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Laboratory- and field-based testing as predictors of skating performance in competitive-level female ice hockey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/oajsm.s109124 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tommy Henriksson, Jason D Vescovi, Anncristine Fjellman-Wiklund, Kajsa Gilenstam |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to examine whether field-based and/or laboratory-based assessments are valid tools for predicting key performance characteristics of skating in competitive-level female hockey players. Cross-sectional study. Twenty-three female ice hockey players aged 15-25 years (body mass: 66.1±6.3 kg; height: 169.5±5.5 cm), with 10.6±3.2 years playing experience volunteered to participate in the study. The field-based assessments included 20 m sprint, squat jump, countermovement jump, 30-second repeated jump test, standing long jump, single-leg standing long jump, 20 m shuttle run test, isometric leg pull, one-repetition maximum bench press, and one-repetition maximum squats. The laboratory-based assessments included body composition (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry), maximal aerobic power, and isokinetic strength (Biodex). The on-ice tests included agility cornering s-turn, cone agility skate, transition agility skate, and modified repeat skate sprint. Data were analyzed using stepwise multivariate linear regression analysis. Linear regression analysis was used to establish the relationship between key performance characteristics of skating and the predictor variables. Regression models (adj R (2)) for the on-ice variables ranged from 0.244 to 0.663 for the field-based assessments and from 0.136 to 0.420 for the laboratory-based assessments. Single-leg tests were the strongest predictors for key performance characteristics of skating. Single leg standing long jump alone explained 57.1%, 38.1%, and 29.1% of the variance in skating time during transition agility skate, agility cornering s-turn, and modified repeat skate sprint, respectively. Isokinetic peak torque in the quadriceps at 90° explained 42.0% and 32.2% of the variance in skating time during agility cornering s-turn and modified repeat skate sprint, respectively. Field-based assessments, particularly single-leg tests, are an adequate substitute to more expensive and time-consuming laboratory assessments if the purpose is to gain knowledge about key performance characteristics of skating. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Andorra | 1 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 13% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 92 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 24 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 44 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 28 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,275,200
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#102
of 260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,950
of 381,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.