↓ Skip to main content

Boosting in Elite Athletes with Spinal Cord Injury: A Critical Review of Physiology and Testing Procedures

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Boosting in Elite Athletes with Spinal Cord Injury: A Critical Review of Physiology and Testing Procedures
Published in
Sports Medicine, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40279-015-0340-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cameron M. Gee, Christopher R. West, Andrei V. Krassioukov

Abstract

Many individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) experience autonomic dysfunction, which can have major implications on heart rate and blood pressure responses to exercise, and consequently athletic performance. Athletic performance may be improved by the induction of autonomic dysreflexia ('boosting'), a dangerous and sometimes life-threatening condition. Here, we review the autonomic response to exercise in individuals with SCI and the current testing methods for boosting, and examine the potential for autonomic testing to be used in the classification of SCI athletes. Given the difficulties associated with researching the effects of boosting, only three studies have compared the physiological performance of elite athletes in the boosted and unboosted state. These studies found athletes had an improved performance of ~7 to 10 % in the boosted state. Blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen consumption, and circulating catecholamines were also higher in the boosted state. Although 27.1 % of athletes believe that boosting was common in their sport, no athlete has ever tested positive for boosting at an event sanctioned by the International Paralympic Committee. Athletes with SCI competing in sports that have a high cardiovascular demand/aerobic component may experience the greatest benefit of boosting. Boosting improves athletic performance even at blood pressure levels well below the current threshold for disqualification set by the International Paralympic Committee, a level at which individuals with SCI are putting their health and lives at serious risk.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Netherlands 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 73 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 19 25%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 23%
Sports and Recreations 14 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 22 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,711,374
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,990
of 2,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,099
of 266,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#19
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,703 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 50.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 266,731 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 70% of its contemporaries.
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 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.