↓ Skip to main content

The appropriateness of training exposures for match-play preparation in adolescent schoolboy and academy rugby union players

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Sports Sciences, May 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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
85 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 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
The appropriateness of training exposures for match-play preparation in adolescent schoolboy and academy rugby union players
Published in
Journal of Sports Sciences, May 2017
DOI 10.1080/02640414.2017.1332421
Pubmed ID
Authors

Padraic J. Phibbs, Ben Jones, Dale B. Read, Gregory A.B. Roe, Joshua Darrall-Jones, Jonathon J.S. Weakley, Andrew Rock, Kevin Till

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the physical and movement demands between training and match-play in schoolboy and academy adolescent rugby union (RU) players. Sixty-one adolescent male RU players (mean ± SD; age 17.0 ± 0.7 years) were recruited from four teams representing school and regional academy standards. Players were categorised into four groups based on playing standard and position: schoolboy forwards (n = 15), schoolboy backs (n = 15), academy forwards (n = 16) and academy backs (n = 15). Global positioning system and accelerometry measures were obtained from training and match-play to assess within-group differences between conditions. Maximum data were analysed from 79 match files across 8 matches (1.3 ± 0.5 matches per participant) and 152 training files across 15 training sessions (2.5 ± 0.5 training sessions per participant). Schoolboy forwards were underprepared for low-intensity activities experienced during match-play, with schoolboy backs underprepared for all movement demands. Academy forwards were exposed to similar physical demands in training to matches, with academy backs similar to or exceeding values for all measured variables. Schoolboy players were underprepared for many key, position-specific aspects of match-play, which could place them at greater risk of injury and hinder performance, unlike academy players who were better prepared.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 85 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 %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 16 15%
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 36 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 40 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 42 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 10 April 2019.
All research outputs
#750,284
of 25,328,635 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Sports Sciences
#216
of 4,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,463
of 322,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Sports Sciences
#7
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,328,635 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 322,699 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 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.