↓ Skip to main content

Effect of a rest-pause vs. traditional squat on electromyography and lifting volume in trained women

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor
video
2 YouTube creators

Readers on

mendeley
101 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.
Article details
Title
Effect of a rest-pause vs. traditional squat on electromyography and lifting volume in trained women
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00421-018-3863-6
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Rest-pause (4 s unloaded rest between repetitions) single session training effects on lifting volume, and muscle activity via electromyography (EMG) are currently vague in the literature and can benefit strength and conditioning professionals for resistance training program design. This study compared differences in volume lifted and muscle activity between a rest-pause vs. traditional protocol. Trained females (N = 13) completed both a rest-pause and traditional squat protocol consisting of four sets to movement failure at 80% pretest 1 repetition maximum load with 2-min rest between sets. Total volume and muscle activity of the vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, rectus femoris, and gluteus maximus were measured on both training days. Differences in muscle activity were viewed as a percent change (%∆). A paired samples t test indicated total volume lifted was higher in the rest-pause compared to the traditional protocol (2532 vs. 2036 kg; p < .05). Furthermore, paired samples t tests showed muscle activity %∆ of the gluteus maximus was greater in the traditional protocol compared to the rest-pause protocol (p < .05). No other muscle activity differences were observed in the remaining muscles. The rest-pause allows for greater volume lifted via increased repetitions compared to a traditional protocol in trained women. The rest-pause method may be superior to a traditional method of training during a hypertrophy mesocycle, where a primary focus is total volume lifted. Furthermore, %∆ muscle activity in the GM will be greater while performing a traditional back squat protocol in comparison to a rest-pause.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Professor 5 5%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 36 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 37 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 37 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 16 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,482,544
of 32,609,759 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#783
of 5,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,787
of 361,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#13
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,609,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 361,885 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.