↓ Skip to main content

Effects of two neuromuscular training programs on running biomechanics with load carriage: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
227 Mendeley
Title
Effects of two neuromuscular training programs on running biomechanics with load carriage: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12891-016-1271-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernard X. W. Liew, Susan Morris, Justin W. L. Keogh, Brendyn Appleby, Kevin Netto

Abstract

In recent years, athletes have ventured into ultra-endurance and adventure racing events, which tests their ability to race, navigate, and survive. These events often require race participants to carry some form of load, to bear equipment for navigation and survival purposes. Previous studies have reported specific alterations in biomechanics when running with load which potentially influence running performance and injury risk. We hypothesize that a biomechanically informed neuromuscular training program would optimize running mechanics during load carriage to a greater extent than a generic strength training program. This will be a two group, parallel randomized controlled trial design, with single assessor blinding. Thirty healthy runners will be recruited to participate in a six weeks neuromuscular training program. Participants will be randomized into either a generic training group, or a biomechanically informed training group. Primary outcomes include self-determined running velocity with a 20 % body weight load, jump power, hopping leg stiffness, knee extensor and triceps-surae strength. Secondary outcomes include running kinetics and kinematics. Assessments will occur at baseline and post-training. To our knowledge, no training programs are available that specifically targets a runner's ability to carry load while running. This will provide sport scientists and coaches with a foundation to base their exercise prescription on. ANZCTR ( ACTRN12616000023459 ) (14 Jan 2016).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 226 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 18%
Student > Bachelor 28 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 10%
Student > Postgraduate 13 6%
Researcher 12 5%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 73 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 55 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 10%
Unspecified 6 3%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Other 19 8%
Unknown 86 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,721,979
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#971
of 4,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,314
of 315,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#18
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 315,610 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 70% of its contemporaries.