↓ Skip to main content

Effects of combined resistance and cardiovascular training on strength, power, muscle cross-sectional area, and endurance markers in middle-aged men

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology, December 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
285 Mendeley
Title
Effects of combined resistance and cardiovascular training on strength, power, muscle cross-sectional area, and endurance markers in middle-aged men
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology, December 2004
DOI 10.1007/s00421-004-1280-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikel Izquierdo, Keijo Häkkinen, Javier Ibáñez, William J. Kraemer, Esteban M. Gorostiaga

Abstract

The effects of a 16-week training period (2 days per week) of resistance training alone (upper- and lower-body extremity exercises) (S), endurance training alone (cycling exercise) (E), or combined resistance (once weekly) and endurance (once weekly) training (SE) on muscle mass, maximal strength (1RM) and power of the leg and arm extensor muscles, maximal workload (W(max)) and submaximal blood lactate accumulation by using an incremental cycling test were examined in middle-aged men [S, n = 11, 43 (2) years; E, n = 10, 42 (2) years; SE, n = 10, 41 (3) years]. During the early phase of training (from week 0 to week 8), the increase 1RM leg strength was similar in both S (22%) and SE (24%) groups, while the increase at week 16 in S (45%) was larger (P < 0.05) than that recorded in SE (37%). During the 16-week training period, the increases in power of the leg extensors at 30% and 45% of 1RM were similar in all groups tested. However, the increases in leg power at the loads of 60% and 70% of 1RM at week 16 in S and SE were larger (P < 0.05) than those recorded in E, and the increase in power of the arm extensors was larger (P < 0.05) in S than in SE (P < 0.05) and E (n.s.). No significant differences were observed in the magnitude of the increases in W(max) between E (14%), SE (12%) and E (10%) during the 16-week training period. During the last 8 weeks of training, the increases in W(max) in E and SE were greater (P < 0.05-0.01) than that observed in S (n.s.). No significant differences between the groups were observed in the training-induced changes in submaximal blood lactate accumulation. Significant decreases (P < 0.05-0.01) in average heart rate were observed after 16 weeks of training in 150 W and 180 W in SE and E, whereas no changes were recorded in S. The data indicate that low-frequency combined training of the leg extensors in previously untrained middle-aged men results in a lower maximal leg strength development only after prolonged training, but does not necessarily affect the development of leg muscle power and cardiovascular fitness recorded in the cycling test when compared with either mode of training alone.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 285 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 5 2%
Spain 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 272 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 14%
Student > Bachelor 41 14%
Student > Postgraduate 21 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 7%
Other 61 21%
Unknown 51 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 129 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 6%
Social Sciences 10 4%
Other 18 6%
Unknown 56 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 December 2019.
All research outputs
#14,771,845
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#2,790
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,654
of 152,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#11
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 152,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.