↓ Skip to main content

Explosive Training and Heavy Weight Training are Effective for Improving Running Economy in Endurance Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
550 X users
facebook
21 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
477 Mendeley
Title
Explosive Training and Heavy Weight Training are Effective for Improving Running Economy in Endurance Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published in
Sports Medicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0604-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benedito Sérgio Denadai, Rafael Alves de Aguiar, Leonardo Coelho Rabello de Lima, Camila Coelho Greco, Fabrizio Caputo

Abstract

Several strategies have been used to improve running economy (RE). Defined as the oxygen uptake required at a given submaximal running velocity, it has been considered a key aerobic parameter related to endurance running performance. In this context, concurrent strength and endurance training has been considered an effective method, although conclusions on the optimal concurrent training cannot yet be drawn. To evaluate the effect of concurrent training on RE in endurance running athletes and identify the effects of subject characteristics and concurrent training variables on the magnitude of RE improvement. We conducted a computerized search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases, and references of original studies were searched for further relevant studies. The analysis comprised 20 effects in 16 relevant studies published up to August 2015. The outcomes were calculated as the difference in percentage change between control and experimental groups (% change) and data were presented as mean ± 95 % confidence limit. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model and, in addition, simple and multiple meta-regression analyses were used to identify effects of age, training status, number of sessions per week, training duration, type of strength training, and neuromuscular performance on % change in RE. The concurrent training program had a small beneficial effect on RE (% change = -3.93 ± 1.19 %; p < 0.001). In addition, explosive (% change = -4.83 ± 1.53; p < 0.001) and heavy weight (% change = -3.65 ± 2.74; p = 0.009) training programs produced similar improvements in RE, while isometric training (% change = -2.20 ± 4.37; p = 0.324) in selected studies did not induce a significant effect. The multiple linear meta-regression analysis showed that all the differences between % changes could be explained by including the above-mentioned characteristics of subjects and weight training program elements. This model showed that the magnitude of the % change in RE was larger for longer training duration (β = -0.83 ± 0.72, p = 0.02). Explosive training and heavy weight training are effective concurrent training methods aiming to improve RE within a few weeks. However, long-term training programs seem to be necessary when the largest possible improvement in RE is desired.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 550 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 477 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 470 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 88 18%
Student > Bachelor 77 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 9%
Other 26 5%
Student > Postgraduate 25 5%
Other 82 17%
Unknown 135 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 214 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 3%
Social Sciences 8 2%
Other 25 5%
Unknown 141 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 403. 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 19 April 2024.
All research outputs
#75,652
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#61
of 2,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,628
of 383,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#2
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,898 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 383,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.