| Title |
A comparison of methods for quantifying training load: relationships between modelled and actual training responses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-013-2745-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
L. K. Wallace, K. M. Slattery, Aaron J. Coutts |
| Abstract |
To assess the validity of methods for quantifying training load, fitness and fatigue in endurance athletes using a mathematical model. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 19% |
| United States | 8 | 14% |
| Australia | 7 | 12% |
| Spain | 4 | 7% |
| Argentina | 2 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 35 | 60% |
| Scientists | 22 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 473 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
| Spain | 4 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 458 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 99 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 77 | 16% |
| Researcher | 45 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 39 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 32 | 7% |
| Other | 106 | 22% |
| Unknown | 75 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 271 | 57% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 5% |
| Engineering | 17 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 41 | 9% |
| Unknown | 94 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 28 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,160,525
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#355
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,449
of 222,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#5
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 222,822 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.