| Title |
10 or 30-s sprint interval training bouts enhance both aerobic and anaerobic performance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, April 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-010-1474-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tom J. Hazell, Rebecca E. K. MacPherson, Braden M. R. Gravelle, Peter W. R. Lemon |
| Abstract |
We assessed whether 10-s sprint interval training (SIT) bouts with 2 or 4 min recovery periods can improve aerobic and anaerobic performance. Subjects (n = 48) were assigned to one of four groups [exercise time (s):recovery time (min)]: (1) 30:4, (2) 10:4, (3) 10:2 or (4) control (no training). Training was cycling 3 week(-1) for 2 weeks (starting with 4 bouts session(-1), increasing 1 bout every 2 sessions, 6 total). Pre- and post-training measures included: VO(2max), 5-km time trial (TT), and a 30-s Wingate test. All groups were similar pre-training and the control group did not change over time. The 10-s groups trained at a higher intensity demonstrated by greater (P < 0.05) reproducibility of peak (10:4 = 96%; 10:2 = 95% vs. 30:4 = 89%), average (10:4 = 84%; 10:2 = 82% vs. 30:4 = 58%), and minimum power (10:4 = 73%; 10:2 = 69%; vs. 30:4 = 40%) within each session while the 30:4 group performed ~2X (P < 0.05) the total work session(-1) (83-124 kJ, 4-6 bouts) versus 10:4 (38-58 kJ); 10:2 (39-59 kJ). Training increased TT performance (P < 0.05) in the 30:4 (5.2%), 10:4 (3.5%), and 10:2 (3.0%) groups. VO(2max) increased in the 30:4 (9.3%) and 10:4 (9.2%), but not the 10:2 group. Wingate peak power kg(-1) increased (P < 0.05) in the 30:4 (9.5%), 10:4 (8.5%), and 10:2 (4.2%). Average Wingate power kg(-1) increased (P < 0.05) in the 30:4 (12.1%) and 10:4 (6.5%) groups. These data indicate that 10-s (with either 2 or 4 min recovery) and 30-s SIT bouts are effective for increasing anaerobic and aerobic performance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 2 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Finland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 458 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 1% |
| Brazil | 5 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| French Polynesia | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 440 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 111 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 98 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 60 | 13% |
| Researcher | 24 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 17 | 4% |
| Other | 78 | 17% |
| Unknown | 70 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 243 | 53% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 5% |
| Unknown | 90 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 July 2023.
All research outputs
#3,798,066
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1,109
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,655
of 104,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#7
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 74% 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 104,882 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.