↓ Skip to main content

How much does lower body strength impact Paralympic running performance?

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Sport Science, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How much does lower body strength impact Paralympic running performance?
Published in
European Journal of Sport Science, January 2016
DOI 10.1080/17461391.2015.1132775
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. M. Beckman, M. J. Connick, S. M. Tweedy

Abstract

Development of evidence-based methods of Paralympic classification requires research quantifying the relative strength of association between ratio-scaled measures of impairment and athletic performance. The purpose of this study was to quantify the extent to which muscle strength affects running performance in runners with and without brain impairment. Cross-sectional study. Participants were 41 male runners: 13 with brain impairments (RBI) and 28 non-disabled (NDR). All participants completed a maximal 60-m sprint and a novel battery of three lower limb isometric strength tests. RBI showed significantly lower strength scores compared with NDR on the more affected side in leg flexion (176 vs. 243 N), leg extension (993 vs. 1661 N) and plantarflexion (824  vs. 1457 N). Significant differences were also seen on the less affected side in plantarflexion (1072 vs. 1508 N). RBI were significantly slower in the acceleration phase (0-15 m) (3.2 s ± 0.3 vs. 2.8 s ± 0.2) and top speed phase (30-60 m) (4.3 s ± 0.6 vs. 3.8 s ± 0.3). Correlation analysis showed stronger relationships between strength and running performance in RBI than NDR; however, the correlations were not significant. This study evaluated measures to assess strength for the purposes of classification and found that the measures were significantly different in RBI compared with NDR indicating the tests were able to capture strength impairment in this population. This study indicates that strength may be an important impairment type to assess in this population, as impairments of muscle strength may influence the outcome of running performance in athletes with more severe impairments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 82 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Researcher 6 7%
Professor 5 6%
Other 19 22%
Unknown 21 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 36 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 23 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 15 February 2016.
All research outputs
#5,279,775
of 25,077,376 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Sport Science
#887
of 1,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,643
of 406,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Sport Science
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,077,376 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 406,742 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.