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 |
The effects of Red Bull energy drink compared with caffeine on cycling time-trial performance.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1123/ijspp.2014-0481 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alannah Quinlivan, Christopher Irwin, Gary D Grant, Sheilandra Anoopkumar-Dukie, Tina Skinner, Michael Leveritt, Ben Desbrow |
| Abstract |
This study investigated the ergogenic effects of a commercial energy drink (Red Bull®) or an equivalent dose of anhydrous caffeine in comparison to a non-caffeinated control beverage on cycling performance. Eleven trained male cyclists (31.7±5.9yrs, 82.3±6.1kg, VO2 max=60.3±7.8mL·kg-1·min-1) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled and cross-over designed study involving three experimental conditions. Participants were randomly administered Red Bull® (9.4mL·kg-1 BM, containing 3mg·kg-1BM caffeine), anhydrous caffeine (3mg·kg-1 BM given in capsule form) or a placebo 90mins before commencing a time trial equivalent to 1hr cycling at 75% peak power output. Carbohydrate and fluid volumes were matched across all trials. Performance improved by 109±153s (2.8%, p=0.039) after Red Bull® compared with placebo and by 120±172s (3.1%, p=0.043) after caffeine compared with placebo. No significant difference (p>0.05) in performance time was detected between Red Bull® and caffeine treatments. There was no significant difference (p>0.05) in mean heart rate or rating of perceived exertion among the three treatments. This study demonstrated that a moderate dose of caffeine consumed as either Red Bull® or in anhydrous form enhanced cycling time trial performance. The ergogenic benefits of Red Bull® energy drink are therefore most likely due to the effects of caffeine, with the other ingredients not likely to offer additional benefit. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 91 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 | 12 | 13% |
| United States | 11 | 12% |
| Australia | 7 | 8% |
| France | 5 | 5% |
| Canada | 5 | 5% |
| Spain | 4 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 2% |
| Austria | 2 | 2% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 30 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 60 | 66% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 16 | 18% |
| Scientists | 15 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Unknown | 151 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 19% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 59 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 15% |
| Unknown | 36 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 20 October 2023.
All research outputs
#517,175
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
#54
of 2,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,068
of 269,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
#1
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 269,964 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.