↓ Skip to main content

Concurrent Strength and Endurance Training

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
223 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
465 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Concurrent Strength and Endurance Training
Published in
Sports Medicine, September 2012
DOI 10.2165/00007256-199928060-00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Leveritt, Peter J. Abernethy, Benjamin K. Barry, Peter A. Logan

Abstract

Concurrent strength and endurance training appears to inhibit strength development when compared with strength training alone. Our understanding of the nature of this inhibition and the mechanisms responsible for it is limited at present. This is due to the difficulties associated with comparing results of studies which differ markedly in a number of design factors, including the mode, frequency, duration and intensity of training, training history of participants, scheduling of training sessions and dependent variable selection. Despite these difficulties, both chronic and acute hypotheses have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of strength inhibition during concurrent training. The chronic hypothesis contends that skeletal muscle cannot adapt metabolically or morphologically to both strength and endurance training simultaneously. This is because many adaptations at the muscle level observed in response to strength training are different from those observed after endurance training. The observation that changes in muscle fibre type and size after concurrent training are different from those observed after strength training provide some support for the chronic hypothesis. The acute hypothesis contends that residual fatigue from the endurance component of concurrent training compromises the ability to develop tension during the strength element of concurrent training. It is proposed that repeated acute reductions in the quality of strength training sessions then lead to a reduction in strength development over time. Peripheral fatigue factors such as muscle damage and glycogen depletion have been implicated as possible fatigue mechanisms associated with the acute hypothesis. Further systematic research is necessary to quantify the inhibitory effects of concurrent training on strength development and to identify different training approaches that may overcome any negative effects of concurrent training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 465 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 449 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 92 20%
Student > Bachelor 80 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 14%
Student > Postgraduate 32 7%
Researcher 31 7%
Other 86 18%
Unknown 80 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 242 52%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 3%
Other 42 9%
Unknown 88 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 18 August 2023.
All research outputs
#6,929,388
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#2,103
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,743
of 189,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#409
of 761 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.8. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 189,935 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 761 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.