↓ Skip to main content

The Effects of Wearable Resistance Training on Metabolic, Kinematic and Kinetic Variables During Walking, Running, Sprint Running and Jumping: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, September 2016
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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
Title
The Effects of Wearable Resistance Training on Metabolic, Kinematic and Kinetic Variables During Walking, Running, Sprint Running and Jumping: A Systematic Review
Published in
Sports Medicine, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0622-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Macadam, John B. Cronin, Kim D. Simperingham

Abstract

Wearable resistance training (WRT) provides a means of activity- or movement-specific overloading, supposedly resulting in better transference to dynamic sporting performance. The purpose of this review was to quantify the acute and longitudinal metabolic, kinematic and/or kinetic changes that occur with WRT during walking, running, sprint running or jumping movements. PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and MEDLINE (EBSCO) were searched using the Boolean phrases (limb OR vest OR trunk) AND (walk* OR run* OR sprint* OR jump* OR bound*) AND (metabolic OR kinetic OR kinematic) AND (load*). A systematic approach was used to evaluate 1185 articles. Articles with injury-free subjects of any age, sex or activity level were included. Thirty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were retained for analysis. Acute trunk loading reduced velocity during treadmill sprint running, but only significantly when loads of 11 % body mass (BM) or greater were used, while over-the-ground sprint running times were significantly reduced with all loads (8-20 %BM). Longitudinal trunk loading significantly increased jump performance with all loads (7-30 %BM), but did not significantly improve sprint running performance. Acute limb loading significantly increased maximum oxygen consumption and energy cost with all loads (0.3-8.5 %BM) in walking and running, while significantly reducing velocity during sprint running. The variation in load magnitude, load orientation, subjects, testing methods and study duration no doubt impact the changes in the variables examined and hence make definitive conclusions problematic. WRT provides a novel training method with potential to improve sporting performance; however, research in this area is still clearly in its infancy, with future research required into the optimum load placement, orientation and magnitude required for adaptation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 157 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Researcher 10 6%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 42 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 67 42%
Engineering 11 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 11 7%
Unknown 50 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 13 May 2019.
All research outputs
#4,071,903
of 25,049,929 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,816
of 2,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,756
of 301,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#32
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,049,929 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,885 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 301,852 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.