| Title |
Effect of training in hypoxia on repeated sprint performance in female athletes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-015-1041-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nobukazu Kasai, Sahiro Mizuno, Sayuri Ishimoto, Etsuko Sakamoto, Misato Maruta, Kazushige Goto |
| Abstract |
This study determined the effect of repeated sprint training in hypoxia (RSH) in female athletes. Thirty-two college female athletes performed repeated cycling sprints of two sets of 10 × 7-s sprints with a 30-s rest between sprints twice per week for 4 weeks under either normoxic conditions (RSN group; FiO2, 20.9%; n = 16) or hypoxic conditions (RSH group; FiO2, 14.5%; n = 16). The repeated sprint ability (10 × 7-s sprints) and maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) were determined before and after the training period. After training, when compared to pre-values, the mean power output was higher in all sprints during the repeated sprint test in the RSH group but only for the second half of the sprints in the RSN group (P ≤ 0.05). The percentage increases in peak and mean power output between before and after the training period were significantly greater in the RSH group than in the RSN group (peak power output, 5.0 ± 0.7% vs. 1.5 ± 0.9%, respectively; mean power output, 9.7 ± 0.9% vs. 6.0 ± 0.8%, respectively; P < 0.05). [Formula: see text] did not change significantly after the training period in either group. Four weeks of RSH further enhanced the peak and mean power output during repeated sprint test compared with RSN. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 18% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 9% |
| Jamaica | 1 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 5 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 11% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 43 | 52% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,102,528
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#185
of 1,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,467
of 263,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#9
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 263,464 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 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 90% of its contemporaries.