Bioelectrical impedance vector-analysis (BIVA) describes cell-mass, cell function and hydration status of an individual or a group. The goal of the present investigation was to provide bioelectrical impedance data for 525 male road cyclists (155 professionals, 79 elite, 59 elite-youth, and 232 amateurs) at the time of their optimal performance level. Data were plotted on the resistance-reactance (R-Xc) graph to characterize cyclists group vectors using BIVA. Compared to the general male population, the mean vector position of the road cyclists indicates a higher body cell mass (BCM) and phase angle (p<0.001). The vector position of the high-performance, compared to the amateur cyclists showed similar patterns with higher BCM and phase angles and higher reactance values for the high-performance athletes (p<0.001). The bio-impedance data were used to calculate the 50%, 75%, and 95% tolerance ellipses of each group of cyclists. The characteristic vector positions of the road cyclists indicate normal hydration and greater muscle mass and function of the high-performance cyclists compared to amateur cyclists and the normal population. The cyclists specific tolerance ellipses, particularly the high-performance cyclists might be used for classifying a cyclist according to the individual vector position and to define target vector regions for lower level cyclists.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 September 2018.
All research outputs
#23,905,169
of 30,051,161 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Sports Sciences
#3,973
of 4,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,539
of 344,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Sports Sciences
#76
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,051,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.5. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 344,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
