↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Do physiological measures predict selected CrossFit® benchmark performance?

Overview of attention for article published in Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
360 Mendeley
Title
Do physiological measures predict selected CrossFit® benchmark performance?
Published in
Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/oajsm.s88265
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scotty J Butcher, Tyler J Neyedly, Karla J Horvey, Chad R Benko

Abstract

CrossFit(®) is a new but extremely popular method of exercise training and competition that involves constantly varied functional movements performed at high intensity. Despite the popularity of this training method, the physiological determinants of CrossFit performance have not yet been reported. The purpose of this study was to determine whether physiological and/or muscle strength measures could predict performance on three common CrossFit "Workouts of the Day" (WODs). Fourteen CrossFit Open or Regional athletes completed, on separate days, the WODs "Grace" (30 clean and jerks for time), "Fran" (three rounds of thrusters and pull-ups for 21, 15, and nine repetitions), and "Cindy" (20 minutes of rounds of five pull-ups, ten push-ups, and 15 bodyweight squats), as well as the "CrossFit Total" (1 repetition max [1RM] back squat, overhead press, and deadlift), maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), and Wingate anaerobic power/capacity testing. Performance of Grace and Fran was related to whole-body strength (CrossFit Total) (r=-0.88 and -0.65, respectively) and anaerobic threshold (r=-0.61 and -0.53, respectively); however, whole-body strength was the only variable to survive the prediction regression for both of these WODs (R (2)=0.77 and 0.42, respectively). There were no significant associations or predictors for Cindy. CrossFit benchmark WOD performance cannot be predicted by VO2max, Wingate power/capacity, or either respiratory compensation or anaerobic thresholds. Of the data measured, only whole-body strength can partially explain performance on Grace and Fran, although anaerobic threshold also exhibited association with performance. Along with their typical training, CrossFit athletes should likely ensure an adequate level of strength and aerobic endurance to optimize performance on at least some benchmark WODs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 360 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 358 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 81 23%
Student > Master 63 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 8%
Student > Postgraduate 21 6%
Researcher 16 4%
Other 58 16%
Unknown 92 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 152 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 3%
Psychology 7 2%
Other 29 8%
Unknown 102 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 11 May 2023.
All research outputs
#3,069,846
of 24,503,376 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#69
of 254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,932
of 268,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,503,376 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 268,097 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 61% of its contemporaries.