| Title |
Effects of different doses of high-speed resistance training on physical performance and quality of life in older women: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s121313 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo, Daniela Diaz, Cristian Martinez-Salazar, Pablo Valdés-Badilla, Pedro Delgado-Floody, Guillermo Méndez-Rebolledo, Rodrigo Cañas-Jamet, Carlos Cristi-Montero, Antonio García-Hermoso, Carlos Celis-Morales, Jason Moran, Thomas W Buford, Leocadio Rodriguez-Mañas, Alicia M Alonso-Martinez, Mikel Izquierdo |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to compare the effects of two frequencies of high-speed resistance training (HSRT) on physical performance and quality of life of older women. A total of 24 older women participated in a 12-week HSRT program composed of either two or three sessions/week (equated for volume and intensity). Women were randomized into three arms: a control group (CG, n=8), a resistance training group performing two sessions/week (RT2, n=8), and a resistance training group performing three sessions/week (RT3, n=8). The training program for both experimental groups included exercises that required high-speed concentric muscle actions. No baseline differences were observed among groups. Compared with the CG, both training groups showed similar small to moderate improvements (P<0.05) in muscle strength, power, functional performance, balance, and quality of life. These results suggest that equated for volume and intensity, two and three training sessions/week of HSRT are equally effective for improving physical performance and quality of life of older women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 13% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 7% |
| Denmark | 1 | 7% |
| Brazil | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 40% |
| Scientists | 5 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 248 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 12% |
| Researcher | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 41 | 17% |
| Unknown | 87 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 54 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 9% |
| Engineering | 5 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 18 | 7% |
| Unknown | 107 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 14 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,622,544
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#389
of 1,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,194
of 417,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#9
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,962 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 417,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.