↓ Skip to main content

High intensity interval training does not impair strength gains in response to resistance training in premenopausal women

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology, April 2017
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
14 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
137 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
High intensity interval training does not impair strength gains in response to resistance training in premenopausal women
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00421-017-3614-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulo Gentil, Claudio Andre Barbosa de Lira, Suedi Gonçalves Cardoso Filho, Cauê Vazquez La Scala Teixeira, James Steele, James Fisher, Juliana Alves Carneiro, Mário Hebling Campos

Abstract

To compare the increases in upper- and lower-body muscle strength in premenopausal women performing resistance training (RT) alone or alongside concurrent high-intensity interval training (CT). Sixteen women (26-40 years) were randomly assigned into two groups that performed either RT or CT. Both groups performed the same RT program; however, CT performed additional high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on a bicycle ergometer before RT. The study lasted 8 weeks and the participants were tested for ten repetition maximum (10RM) load in elbow flexion (barbell biceps curl) and knee extension exercises pre- and post-intervention. RT was performed with 10-12 repetitions to self-determined repetition maximum in the first four weeks and then progressed to 8-10. During CT, HIIT was performed before RT with six 1-min bouts at 7-8 of perceived subjective exertion (RPE) and then progressed to eight bouts at 9-10 RPE. Analysis of variance revealed significant increases in upper and lower body strength for both the RT and CT groups. Biceps barbell curl 10RM load increased from 12.9 ± 3.2 kg to 14 ± 1.5 kg in CT (p < 0.05) and from 13 ± 1.8 kg to 15.9 ± 2.5 kg in RT (p < 0.05), with no significant between-groups differences. Knee extension 10RM increase from 31.9 ± 11.6 kg to 37.5 ± 8.5 kg for CT (p < 0.05) and from 30.6 ± 8.6 kg to 41.2 ± 7.4 kg for RT (p < 0.05). In conclusion, performing HIIT on a cycle ergometer before resistance training does not seem to impair muscle strength increases in the knee extensors or elbow flexors of pre-menopausal women. This information should be considered when prescribing exercise sessions, since both activities may be combined without negative effects in muscle strength.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 137 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Researcher 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 52 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 48 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 53 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 12 February 2020.
All research outputs
#4,176,712
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1,170
of 4,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,591
of 324,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#36
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,362 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 324,473 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 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.