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 |
Modelling endurance and resumption times for repetitive one-hand pushing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ergonomics, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1080/00140139.2018.1427282 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda M. Rose, Catherine A. A. Beauchemin, W. Patrick Neumann |
| Abstract |
This study's objective was to develop models of endurance time (ET), as a function of load level (LL), and of resumption time (RT) after loading as a function of both LL and loading time (LT) for repeated loadings. Ten male participants with experience in construction work each performed fifteen different one-handed repetaed pushing tasks at shoulder height with varied exerted force and duration. This data was used to create regression models predicting ET and RT. It is concluded that power law relationships are most appropriate to use when modelling ET and RT. While the data the equations are based on is limited regarding number of participants, gender, postures, magnitude and type of exerted force, the paper suggests how this kind of modelling can be used in job design and in further research. Practitioner Summary: Adequate muscular recovery during work-shifts is important to create sustainable jobs. This paper describes mathematical modelling and presents models for endurance times and resumption times (an aspect of recovery need), based on data from an empirical study. The models can be used to help manage fatigue levels in job design. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 8 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,493,741
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Ergonomics
#1,773
of 2,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#291,600
of 474,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ergonomics
#22
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,276 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 474,295 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.