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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Abdominal muscle response to a simulated weight-bearing task by elite Australian Rules football players
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Movement Science, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.humov.2011.04.005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jodie Hyde, Warren R. Stanton, Julie A. Hides |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to examine the automatic recruitment of the deep abdominal muscles during a unilateral simulated weight-bearing task by elite Australian Rules football (AFL) players with and without low back pain (LBP). An observational cross-sectional study was conducted using ultrasound imaging to measure the thickness of the internal oblique (IO) and transversus abdominis (TrA) muscles. Thirty-seven elite male AFL players participated. Repeated measures factors included 'force level' (rest, 25% and 45% of body weight), 'leg' (dominant or non-dominant kicking leg) and 'side' (ultrasound side ipsilateral or contralateral to the leg used for the weight-bearing task). The dependent variables were thickness of the IO and TrA muscles. The results of this study showed that thickness of the IO (p<.0001) and TrA (p<.0001) muscles increased in response to 'force level'. During the task, the thickness of the IO muscle on the contralateral side of the trunk relative to the leg being tested, increased more in participants with current LBP (p=.034). This pattern was more distinct on the non-dominant kicking leg. Altered abdominal muscle recruitment in elite athletes with low back pain may be an attempt by the central nervous system (CNS) to compensate for inadequate lumbo-pelvic stability. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 33% |
| Unknown | 6 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 23 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 20 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 26 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,118,975
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Human Movement Science
#234
of 1,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,393
of 131,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Movement Science
#4
of 16 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 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,214 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. 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 131,760 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.