| Title |
Effect of downhill walking on next-day muscle damage and glucose metabolism in healthy young subjects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12576-018-0614-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Airi Nakayama, Wataru Aoi, Maki Takami, Nariyuki Hirano, Yumi Ogaya, Sayori Wada, Akane Higashi |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to investigate the effect of downhill walking on muscle damage and glucose metabolism in healthy subjects. All ten healthy young men and women (age, 24.0 ± 1.4 years) performed rest, uphill walking, and downhill walking trials. In the exercise trials, uphill (+ 5%) or downhill (- 5%) treadmill walking was performed at 6 km/h for 30 min. On the next day, muscle soreness was significantly higher in the downhill trial than in the uphill trial (P < 0.01). Respiratory metabolic performance did not differ between trials. However, carbohydrate oxidation was negatively correlated with plasma creatine kinase (r = - 0.41) and muscle soreness (r = - 0.47). Fasting blood glucose was significantly lower in the uphill trial than in the rest trial (P < 0.01) but not in the downhill trial. These observations suggest that downhill but not uphill walking causes mild delayed-onset muscle damage, which did not cause marked impairment in glucose metabolism. However, higher muscle damage responders might exhibit lower glucose metabolism. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 11% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 46% |
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 22 April 2018.
All research outputs
#19,495,804
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#221
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,669
of 330,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 330,442 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.