| Title |
Resistance exercise performance variability at submaximal intensities in older and younger adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s55719 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gregory J Grosicki, Michael E Miller, Anthony P Marsh |
| Abstract |
We assessed the variability in the number of repetitions completed at submaximal loads in three resistance tasks in older (N=32, 16 female, 74.3±5.4 years) and younger (N=16, 8 female, 22.8±1.8 years) men and women. One repetition maximum (1RM) was determined on two separate visits on three tasks: leg press (LP), leg extension (LE), and bicep curl (BC). Subjects then completed repetitions to failure on each of the three tasks during two visits, a minimum of 48 hours apart, at either 60% 1RM or 80% 1RM. High reliability for all 1RM assessments was observed. Greater muscular strength was observed in younger compared to older men and women on all tasks (P<0.05). At both 60% and 80% 1RM, considerable interindividual variability was observed in the number of repetitions completed. However, the average number of repetitions completed by younger and older men and women at 60% and 80% 1RM in each of the three tasks was similar, with the only significant difference occurring between younger and older men at 80% 1RM on the leg press (P=0.0258). We did not observe any abnormal blood pressure responses to either the 1RM testing or maximal repetition testing sessions. Considerable interindividual variability was observed in the number of repetitions completed by younger and older men and women at relative intensities typical of resistance training programs. Practitioners should give consideration to individual variability when attempting to maximize the benefits of resistance training. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 43% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 19 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 29 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 23 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,975,214
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#748
of 1,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,447
of 320,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#16
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 320,237 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.