↓ Skip to main content

Caffeine Ingestion and Cycling Power Output in a Low or Normal Muscle Glycogen State

Overview of attention for article published in Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, August 2013
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 (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
220 tweeters
facebook
22 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 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
Caffeine Ingestion and Cycling Power Output in a Low or Normal Muscle Glycogen State
Published in
Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise, August 2013
DOI 10.1249/mss.0b013e31828af183
Pubmed ID
Authors

STEPHEN C. LANE, JOSE L. ARETA, STEPHEN R. BIRD, VERNON G. COFFEY, LOUISE M. BURKE, BEN DESBROW, LEONIDAS G. KARAGOUNIS, JOHN A. HAWLEY

Abstract

Commencing selected workouts with low muscle glycogen availability augments several markers of training adaptation compared with undertaking the same sessions with normal glycogen content. However, low glycogen availability reduces the capacity to perform high-intensity (>85% of peak aerobic power (VO2 peak)) endurance exercise. We determined whether a low dose of caffeine could partially rescue the reduction in maximal self-selected power output observed when individuals commenced high-intensity interval training with low (LOW) compared with normal (NORM) glycogen availability.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 220 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 153 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 42 27%
Student > Master 35 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 9 6%
Other 28 18%
Unknown 11 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 72 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 6%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 15 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 177. 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 15 May 2017.
All research outputs
#100,187
of 15,363,330 outputs
Outputs from Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
#109
of 5,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#810
of 150,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
#3
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,363,330 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 150,948 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 75 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 96% of its contemporaries.