| Title |
A comparison of the physiological consequences of head-loading and back-loading for African and European women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, February 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-010-1395-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. Lloyd, B. Parr, S. Davies, T. Partridge, C. Cooke |
| Abstract |
The aim is to quantify the physiological cost of head-load carriage and to examine the 'free ride' hypothesis for head-load carriage in groups of women differing in their experience of head-loading. Twenty-four Xhosa women [13 experienced head-loaders (EXP), 11 with no experience of head-loading (NON)] attempted to carry loads of up to 70% of body mass on both their heads and backs whilst walking on a treadmill at a self-selected walking speed. Expired air was collected throughout. In a second study nine women, members of the British Territorial Army, carried similar loads, again at a self-selected speed. Maximum load carried was greater for the back than the head (54.7 +/- 15.1 vs. 40.8 +/- 13.2% BM, P < 0.0005). Considering study one, head-loading required a greater oxygen rate than back-loading (10.1 +/- 2.6 vs. 8.8 +/- 2.3 ml kg bodymass(-1) min(-1), P = 0.043, for loads 10-25% BM) regardless of previous head-loading experience (P = 0.333). Percentage changes in oxygen consumption associated with head-loading were greater than the proportional load added in both studies but were smaller than the added load for the lighter loads carried on the back in study 1. All other physiological variables were consistent with changes in oxygen consumption. The data provides no support for the 'free ride' hypothesis for head-loading although there is some evidence of energy saving mechanisms for back-loading at low speed/load combinations. Investigating the large individual variation in response may help in identifying combinations of factors that contribute to improved economy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 15 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 August 2021.
All research outputs
#7,356,343
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1,884
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,766
of 102,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#16
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 102,464 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 58% of its contemporaries.