↓ Skip to main content

Swimming and bone: Is low bone mass due to hypogravity alone or does other physical activity influence it?

Overview of attention for article published in Osteoporosis International, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
Swimming and bone: Is low bone mass due to hypogravity alone or does other physical activity influence it?
Published in
Osteoporosis International, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00198-015-3448-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Gómez-Bruton, A. González-Agüero, A. Gómez-Cabello, A. Matute-Llorente, J. A. Casajús, G. Vicente-Rodríguez

Abstract

Swimming during adolescence has shown neutral or even negative effects on bone mass. Nevertheless, it is still unknown if these effects are due to swimming or to other factors, such as sedentary behaviors. Three objectives were described (1) to measure objective physical activity (PA) additional to swimming performed by adolescent swimmers (SWI) and compare it to that performed by normo-active controls (CG), (2) to describe the relationship between objectively measured PA and bone mass, and (3) to compare bone mass of swimmers that meet the World Health Organization PA guidelines (active) WHO and those that do not (inactive). A total of 71 SWI (33 females) and 41 CG (17 females) wore an accelerometer for at least 4 days. PA was expressed as the amount of time (minutes/day) in each intensity [sedentary/light/moderate or vigorous (VPA), and the sum of moderate and vigorous (MVPA)]. Using the cutoff points proposed by Vanhelst et al. SWI were classified as active or inactive according to whether they reached 60 min of weight-bearing MVPA per day or not. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, and bone strength values were calculated with peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Differences in PA intensities were calculated between SWI and CG. The relation of VPA to bone mass was studied in the SWI. Male-SWI spend less time in VPA and MVPA than male-GC, which partly explains the lower BMD values in SWI than CG. Swimming may displace weight-bearing VPA with serious implications on bone health.

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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 91 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 28%
Student > Bachelor 18 20%
Other 7 8%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 23%
Sports and Recreations 17 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 27 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 25 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,135,774
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#1,248
of 3,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,699
of 390,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#23
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 390,618 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 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.