| Title |
Application of ‘Live Low-Train High’ for Enhancing Normoxic Exercise Performance in Team Sport Athletes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-014-0204-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Blake D. McLean, Christopher J. Gore, Justin Kemp |
| Abstract |
Hypoxic training techniques are increasingly used by athletes in an attempt to improve performance in normoxic environments. The 'live low-train high (LLTH)' model of hypoxic training may be of particular interest to athletes because LLTH protocols generally involve shorter hypoxic exposures (approximately two to five sessions per week of <3 h) than other traditional hypoxic training techniques (e.g. live high-train high or live high-train low). However, the methods employed in LLTH studies to date vary greatly with respect to exposure times, training intensities, training modalities, degrees of hypoxia and performance outcomes assessed. Whilst recent reviews provide some insight into how LLTH may be applied to enhance performance, little attention has been given to how training intensity/modality may specifically influence subsequent performance in normoxia. Therefore, this systematic review aims to evaluate the normoxic performance outcomes of the available LLTH literature, with a particular focus on training intensity and modality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 | 22% |
| United States | 5 | 10% |
| Australia | 4 | 8% |
| Mexico | 2 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 43% |
| Scientists | 16 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 274 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 54 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 13% |
| Researcher | 19 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 45 | 16% |
| Unknown | 73 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 124 | 44% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 5% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 6% |
| Unknown | 77 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,024,820
of 24,513,158 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#899
of 2,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,110
of 231,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#26
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,513,158 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 2,844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 54.4. 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 231,021 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 52 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.