↓ Skip to main content

Influence of playing standard on the physical demands of professional rugby league

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Sports Sciences, February 2013
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Influence of playing standard on the physical demands of professional rugby league
Published in
Journal of Sports Sciences, February 2013
DOI 10.1080/02640414.2013.773401
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim J. Gabbett

Abstract

In this paper we report on two studies that investigated the physical demands of professional rugby league match-play. Instudy one, National Rugby League (NRL) and National Youth Competition (NYC) players underwent global positioning system (GPS) analysis during competitive matches. No differences (P > 0.05) were observed between playing standards for minutes played, total distance covered, or the distances covered at low and high speeds. However, NRL players engaged in significantly more repeated high-intensity effort bouts than NYC players (13.1 ± 0.8 bouts vs. 9.7 ± 1.1 bouts). Reductions in physical performance occurred from the first to second half for both NRL and NYC players. In study two, we investigated, in the same players, the physical demands of professional rugby league match-play when players were competing in trial and regular fixture matches. The locomotor demands of trial matches were lower than fixture matches, with players covering less distance per minute of match-play, including less distance at low and high speeds. Players were also less likely to engage in repeated high-intensity effort bouts in trial matches than fixtures. These findings demonstrate that neither NYC matches nor NRL trial matches adequately reflect the intense physical demands of NRL fixture matches.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 109 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 20%
Student > Master 21 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Researcher 6 5%
Other 5 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 60 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 29 26%
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 22 January 2014.
All research outputs
#3,245,297
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Sports Sciences
#1,325
of 4,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,007
of 205,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Sports Sciences
#7
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 4,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 205,493 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.