↓ Skip to main content

The Potential for High-Intensity Interval Training to Reduce Cardiometabolic Disease Risk

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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
29 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
332 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
719 Mendeley
Title
The Potential for High-Intensity Interval Training to Reduce Cardiometabolic Disease Risk
Published in
Sports Medicine, December 2012
DOI 10.2165/11630910-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Holly S. Kessler, Susan B. Sisson, Kevin R. Short

Abstract

In the US, 34% of adults currently meet the criteria for the metabolic syndrome defined by elevated waist circumference, plasma triglycerides (TG), fasting glucose and/or blood pressure, and decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). While these cardiometabolic risk factors can be treated with medication, lifestyle modification is strongly recommended as a first-line approach. The purpose of this review is to focus on the effect of physical activity interventions and, specifically, on the potential benefits of incorporating higher intensity exercise. Several recent studies have suggested that compared with continuous moderate exercise (CME), high-intensity interval training (HIT) may result in a superior or equal improvement in fitness and cardiovascular health. HIT is comprised of brief periods of high-intensity exercise interposed with recovery periods at a lower intensity. The premise of using HIT in both healthy and clinical populations is that the vigorous activity segments promote greater adaptations via increased cellular stress, yet their short length, and the ensuing recovery intervals, allow even untrained individuals to work harder than would otherwise be possible at steady-state intensity. In this review, we examine the impact of HIT on cardiometabolic risk factors, anthropometric measures of obesity and cardiovascular fitness in both healthy and clinical populations with cardiovascular and metabolic disease. The effects of HIT versus CME on health outcomes were compared in 14 of the 24 studies featuring HIT. Exercise programmes ranged from 2 weeks to 6 months. All 17 studies that measured aerobic fitness and all seven studies that measured insulin sensitivity showed significant improvement in response to HIT, although these changes did not always exceed responses to CME comparison groups. A minimum duration of 12 weeks was necessary to demonstrate improvement in fasting glucose in four of seven studies (57%). A minimum duration of 8 weeks of HIT was necessary to demonstrate improvement in HDL-C in three of ten studies (30%). No studies reported that HIT resulted in improvement of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), or TG. At least 12 weeks of HIT was required for reduction in blood pressure to emerge in five studies of participants not already being treated for hypertension. A minimum duration of 12 weeks was necessary to see consistent improvement in the six studies that examined anthropometric measures of obesity in overweight/obese individuals. In the 13 studies with a matched-exercise-volume CME group, improvement in aerobic fitness in response to HIT was equal to (5 studies), or greater than (8 studies) in response to CME. Additionally, HIT has been shown to be safe and effective in patients with a range of cardiac and metabolic dysfunction. In conclusion, HIT appears to promote superior improvements in aerobic fitness and similar improvements in some cardiometabolic risk factors in comparison to CME, when performed by healthy subjects or clinical patients for at least 8-12 weeks. Future studies need to address compliance and efficacy of HIT in the real world with a variety of populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 719 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 <1%
United States 5 <1%
Canada 4 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 687 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 145 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 110 15%
Student > Bachelor 104 14%
Researcher 46 6%
Student > Postgraduate 38 5%
Other 164 23%
Unknown 112 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 236 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 121 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 67 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 52 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 3%
Other 67 9%
Unknown 151 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 125. 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 22 May 2021.
All research outputs
#332,320
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#326
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,212
of 289,094 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#14
of 324 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th 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 88% 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 289,094 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 99% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.