↓ Skip to main content

Pre-Cooling and Sports Performance

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
28 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
Title
Pre-Cooling and Sports Performance
Published in
Sports Medicine, December 2012
DOI 10.2165/11630550-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melissa Wegmann, Oliver Faude, Wigand Poppendieck, Anne Hecksteden, Michael Fröhlich, Tim Meyer

Abstract

Pre-cooling is used by many athletes for the purpose of reducing body temperature prior to exercise and, consequently, decreasing heat stress and improving performance. Although there are a considerable number of studies showing beneficial effects of pre-cooling, definite conclusions on the effectiveness of pre-cooling on performance cannot yet be drawn. Moreover, detailed analyses of the specific conditions under which pre-cooling may be most promising are, so far, missing. Therefore, we conducted a literature search and located 27 peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials, which addressed the effects of pre-cooling on performance. These studies were analysed with regard to performance effects and several test circumstances (environmental temperature, test protocol, cooling method, aerobic capacity of the subjects). Eighteen studies were performed in a hot (>26°C) environment and eight in a moderate. The cooling protocols were water application (n = 12), cooling packs (n = 3), cold drinks (n = 2), cooling vest (n = 6) and a cooled room (n = 4). The following different performance tests were used: short-term, high-intensity sprints (n = 2), intermittent sprints (n = 6), time trials (n = 10), open-end tests (n = 7) and graded exercise tests (n = 2). If possible, subjects were grouped into different aerobic capacity levels according to their maximal oxygen consumption (VO(2max)): medium 55-65 mL/kg/min (n = 11) and high >65 mL/kg/min (n = 6). For all studies the relative changes of performance due to pre-cooling compared with a control condition, as well as effect sizes (Hedges' g) were calculated. Mean values were weighted according to the number of subjects in each study. Pre-cooling had a larger effect on performance in hot (+6.6%, g = 0.62) than in moderate temperatures (+1.4%, g = 0.004). The largest performance enhancements were found for endurance tests like open-end tests (+8.6%, g = 0.52), graded exercise tests (+6.0%, g = 0.44) and time trials (+4.2%, g = 0.44). A similar effect was observed for intermittent sprints (+3.3%, g = 0.43), whereas performance changes were smaller during short-term, high-intensity sprints (-0.5%, g = 0.03). The most promising cooling methods were cold drinks (+15.0%, g = 1.68), cooling packs (+5.6%, g = 0.70) and a cooled room (+10.7%, g = 0.49), whereas a cooling vest (+4.8%, g = 0.31) and water application (+1.2%, g = 0.21) showed only small effects. With respect to aerobic capacity, the best results were found in the subjects with the highest VO(2max) (high +7.7%, g = 0.65; medium +3.8%, g = 0.27). There were four studies analysing endurance-trained athletes under time-trial conditions, which, in a practical sense, seem to be most relevant. Those studies found an average effect on performance of 3.7% (g = 0.48). In summary, pre-cooling can effectively enhance endurance performance, particularly in hot environments, whereas sprint exercise is barely affected. In particular, well trained athletes may benefit in a typical competition setting with practical and relevant effects. With respect to feasibility, cold drinks, cooling packs and cooling vests can be regarded as best-practice methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Spain 3 2%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 159 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 37 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 17%
Student > Master 20 12%
Researcher 15 9%
Lecturer 11 6%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 43 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 73 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Psychology 5 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 2%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 48 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 24 August 2021.
All research outputs
#772,326
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#708
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,736
of 289,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#42
of 324 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 289,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 324 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.