↓ Skip to main content

Acute effects of different conditioning activities on running performance of sprinters

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Acute effects of different conditioning activities on running performance of sprinters
Published in
SpringerPlus, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2860-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takaya Yoshimoto, Yohei Takai, Hiroaki Kanehisa

Abstract

This study investigated acute effects of different conditioning activities on sprint performance of collegiate sprinters using a randomized, crossover design. Male sprinters (N = 10; 20.1 ± 0.6 years; 174.6 ± 4.4 cm; 66.7 ± 3.5 kg; 100-m race personal best time, 11.46 ± 0.57 s; means ± SDs) performed two 60-m sprints and one of three treatments within the same day, with an interval of 2 days between the treatments. The baseline sprint was followed by one of three different conditioning activities: mini-hurdles, bounding jumps, or a free sprint. Participants then performed the post treatment sprint. In the mini-hurdle drill, the participants ran over 10 × 10 mini-hurdles (height 22 cm) as fast as possible. In the bounding jump drill, the participants performed three 60-m bounding jumps as explosively and far as possible, with 3 min intervals between trials. In the free-sprint conditioning activity, the participants performed a 60-m maximal sprint twice, with a 5 min interval between sprints. Sprint kinematics in the baseline and post treatment sprints were recorded using a high-speed camera (300 Hz). Using these films, sprint time, running velocity, step length, and step frequency were analyzed over 10 m intervals. The results of ANOVAs indicated that the mini-hurdle drill increased the maximal sprint velocity (3.2 %) and maximal step frequency (3.3 %); the other conditioning activities had no such effects. Step length did not change after any of the conditioning activities. These results suggest that conditioning activities with mini-hurdles, which require movements with a high step frequency, acutely enhances velocity during sprinting, possibly as a result of increasing step frequency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 34%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 13 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Unspecified 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 13 March 2024.
All research outputs
#7,039,268
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#380
of 1,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,356
of 381,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#65
of 296 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 381,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 296 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.