↓ Skip to main content

A Scientific Rationale to Improve Resistance Training Prescription in Exercise Oncology

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, January 2017
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 (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
64 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
Title
A Scientific Rationale to Improve Resistance Training Prescription in Exercise Oncology
Published in
Sports Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40279-017-0673-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ciaran M. Fairman, Michael C. Zourdos, Eric R. Helms, Brian C. Focht

Abstract

To date, the prevailing evidence in the field of exercise oncology supports the safety and efficacy of resistance training to attenuate many oncology treatment-related adverse effects, such as risk for cardiovascular disease, increased fatigue, and diminished physical functioning and quality of life. Moreover, findings in the extant literature supporting the benefits of exercise for survivors of and patients with cancer have resulted in the release of exercise guidelines from several international agencies. However, despite research progression and international recognition, current exercise oncology-based exercise prescriptions remain relatively basic and underdeveloped, particularly in regards to resistance training. Recent publications have called for a more precise manipulation of training variables such as volume, intensity, and frequency (i.e., periodization), given the large heterogeneity of a cancer population, to truly optimize clinically relevant patient-reported outcomes. Indeed, increased attention to integrating fundamental principles of exercise physiology into the exercise prescription process could optimize the safety and efficacy of resistance training during cancer care. The purpose of this article is to give an overview of the current state of resistance training prescription and discuss novel methods that can contribute to improving approaches to exercise prescription. We hope this article may facilitate further evaluation of best practice regarding resistance training prescription, monitoring, and modification to ultimately optimize the efficacy of integrating resistance training as a supportive care intervention for survivors or and patients with cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 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 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 191 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 18%
Student > Bachelor 22 11%
Researcher 18 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 51 27%
Unknown 36 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 60 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 52 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,029,343
of 24,953,268 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#902
of 2,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,899
of 432,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#22
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,953,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 432,859 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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 51% of its contemporaries.