| Title |
Optimising high-intensity treadmill training using the running speed at maximal O2 uptake and the time for which this can be maintained
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, March 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-003-0806-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Timothy P. Smith, Jeff S. Coombes, Dominic P. Geraghty |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two high-intensity, treadmill interval-training programs on 3000-m and 5000-m running performance. Maximal oxygen uptake (.VO(2max)), the running speed associated with .VO(2max) (v.VO(2max)), the time for which v.VO(2max) can be maintained (T(max)), running economy (RE), ventilatory threshold (VT) and 3000-m and 5000-m running times were determined in 27 well-trained runners. Subjects were then randomly assigned to three groups; (1) 60% T(max), (2) 70% T(max) and (3) control. Subjects in the control group continued their normal training and subjects in the two T(max) groups undertook a 4-week treadmill interval-training program with the intensity set at v.VO(2max) and the interval duration at the assigned T(max). These subjects completed two interval-training sessions per week (60% T(max)=six intervals/session, 70% T(max) group=five intervals/session). Subjects were re-tested on all parameters at the completion of the training program. There was a significant improvement between pre- and post-training values in 3000-m time trial (TT) performance in the 60% T(max) group compared to the 70% T(max) and control groups [mean (SE); 60% T(max)=17.6 (3.5) s, 70% T(max) =6.3 (4.2) s, control=0.5 (7.7) s]. There was no significant effect of the training program on 5000-m TT performance [60% T(max)=25.8 (13.8) s, 70% T(max)=3.7 (11.6) s, control=9.9 (13.1) s]. Although there were no significant improvements in .VO(2max), v.VO(2max) and RE between groups, changes in .VO(2max) and RE were significantly correlated with the improvement in the 3000-m TT. Furthermore, VT and T(max) were significantly higher in the 60% T(max) group post- compared to pre-training. In conclusion, 3000-m running performance can be significantly improved in a group of well-trained runners, using a 4-week treadmill interval training program at v.VO(2max) with interval durations of 60% T(max). |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 7 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 219 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 59 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 11% |
| Researcher | 14 | 6% |
| Professor | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 55 | 24% |
| Unknown | 31 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 117 | 50% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 4% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 6% |
| Unknown | 39 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 04 June 2015.
All research outputs
#2,614,735
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#844
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,396
of 62,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 well, scoring higher than 80% 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 62,882 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 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.