| Title |
Effects of strength, endurance and combined training on muscle strength, walking speed and dynamic balance in aging men
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, July 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-011-2089-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Holviala, W. J. Kraemer, E. Sillanpää, H. Karppinen, J. Avela, A. Kauhanen, A. Häkkinen, K. Häkkinen |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to examine effects of 21-week twice weekly strength (ST), endurance (ET) and combined (ST + ET 2 + 2 times a week) (SET) training on neuromuscular, endurance and walking performances as well as balance. 108 healthy men (56.3 ± 9.9 years) were divided into three training (ST; n = 30, ET; n = 26, SET; n = 31) groups and controls (C n = 21). Dynamic 1RM and explosive leg presses (1RMleg, 50%1RMleg), peak oxygen uptake using a bicycle ergometer (VO(2peak)), 10 m loaded walking time (10WALK) and dynamic balance distance (DYND) were measured. Significant increases were observed in maximal 1RMleg of 21% in ST (p < 0.001) and 22% in SET (p < 0.001) and in explosive 50%1RMleg of 7.5% in ST (p = 0.005) and 10.2% in SET (p < 0.001). VO(2peak) increased by 12.5% in ET (p = 0.001) and 9.8% in SET (p < 0.001). Significant decreases occurred in 10WALK in ST (p < 0.001) and SET (p = 0.003) and also in DYND of -10.3% in ST (p = 0.002) and -8% in SET (p = 0.028). The changes in C remained minor in all variables. In conclusion, ST and SET training produced significant improvements in maximal and explosive strength, walking speed and balance without any interference effect in SET. Significant but moderate relationships were observed between strength and dynamic balance and walking speed, while no corresponding correlations were found in the ET group. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 212 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 36 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 11% |
| Researcher | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 20 | 9% |
| Other | 31 | 14% |
| Unknown | 59 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 65 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 29 | 13% |
| Unknown | 64 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 February 2015.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#3,226
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,675
of 130,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#45
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 130,279 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.