↓ Skip to main content

The Relationships Between Internal and External Measures of Training Load and Intensity in Team Sports: A Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, December 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 (98th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
250 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
256 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
794 Mendeley
Title
The Relationships Between Internal and External Measures of Training Load and Intensity in Team Sports: A Meta-Analysis
Published in
Sports Medicine, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40279-017-0830-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaun J. McLaren, Tom W. Macpherson, Aaron J. Coutts, Christopher Hurst, Iain R. Spears, Matthew Weston

Abstract

The associations between internal and external measures of training load and intensity are important in understanding the training process and the validity of specific internal measures. We aimed to provide meta-analytic estimates of the relationships, as determined by a correlation coefficient, between internal and external measures of load and intensity during team-sport training and competition. A further aim was to examine the moderating effects of training mode on these relationships. We searched six electronic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL) for original research articles published up to September 2017. A Boolean search phrase was created to include search terms relevant to team-sport athletes (population; 37 keywords), internal load (dependent variable; 35 keywords), and external load (independent variable; 81 keywords). Articles were considered for meta-analysis when a correlation coefficient describing the association between at least one internal and one external measure of session load or intensity, measured in the time or frequency domain, was obtained from team-sport athletes during normal training or match-play (i.e., unstructured observational study). The final data sample included 122 estimates from 13 independent studies describing 15 unique relationships between three internal and nine external measures of load and intensity. This sample included 295 athletes and 10,418 individual session observations. Internal measures were session ratings of perceived exertion (sRPE), sRPE training load (sRPE-TL), and heart-rate-derived training impulse (TRIMP). External measures were total distance (TD), the distance covered at high and very high speeds (HSRD ≥ 13.1-15.0 km h-1 and VHSRD ≥ 16.9-19.8 km h-1, respectively), accelerometer load (AL), and the number of sustained impacts (Impacts > 2-5 G). Distinct training modes were identified as either mixed (reference condition), skills, metabolic, or neuromuscular. Separate random effects meta-analyses were conducted for each dataset (n = 15) to determine the pooled relationships between internal and external measures of load and intensity. The moderating effects of training mode were examined using random-effects meta-regression for datasets with at least ten estimates (n = 4). Magnitude-based inferences were used to interpret analyses outcomes. During all training modes combined, the external load relationships for sRPE-TL were possibly very large with TD [r = 0.79; 90% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.83], possibly large with AL (r = 0.63; 90% CI 0.54 to 0.70) and Impacts (r = 0.57; 90% CI 0.47 to 0.64), and likely moderate with HSRD (r = 0.47; 90% CI 0.32 to 0.59). The relationship between TRIMP and AL was possibly large (r = 0.54; 90% CI 0.40 to 0.66). All other relationships were unclear or not possible to infer (r range 0.17-0.74, n = 10 datasets). Between-estimate heterogeneity [standard deviations (SDs) representing unexplained variation; τ] in the pooled internal-external relationships were trivial to extremely large for sRPE (τ range = 0.00-0.47), small to large for sRPE-TL (τ range = 0.07-0.31), and trivial to moderate for TRIMP (τ range= 0.00-0.17). The internal-external load relationships during mixed training were possibly very large for sRPE-TL with TD (r = 0.82; 90% CI 0.75 to 0.87) and AL (r = 0.81; 90% CI 0.74 to 0.86), and TRIMP with AL (r = 0.72; 90% CI 0.55 to 0.84), and possibly large for sRPE-TL with HSRD (r = 0.65; 90% CI 0.44 to 0.80). A reduction in these correlation magnitudes was evident for all other training modes (range of the change in r when compared with mixed training - 0.08 to - 0.58), with these differences being unclear to possibly large. Training mode explained 24-100% of the between-estimate variance in the internal-external load relationships. Measures of internal load derived from perceived exertion and heart rate show consistently positive associations with running- and accelerometer-derived external loads and intensity during team-sport training and competition, but the magnitude and uncertainty of these relationships are measure and training mode dependent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 250 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 794 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 794 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 145 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 98 12%
Student > Bachelor 91 11%
Researcher 54 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 37 5%
Other 130 16%
Unknown 239 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 365 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 4%
Social Sciences 18 2%
Engineering 13 2%
Other 46 6%
Unknown 281 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 165. 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 23 December 2023.
All research outputs
#251,785
of 25,757,133 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#236
of 2,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,608
of 451,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#13
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,757,133 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,897 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.3. 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 451,501 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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 72% of its contemporaries.