↓ Skip to main content

Association of “Weekend Warrior” and Other Leisure Time Physical Activity Patterns With Risks for All-Cause, Cardiovascular Disease, and Cancer Mortality

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Internal Medicine, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 4,544)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
192 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
425 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Association of “Weekend Warrior” and Other Leisure Time Physical Activity Patterns With Risks for All-Cause, Cardiovascular Disease, and Cancer Mortality
Published in
JAMA Internal Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gary O’Donovan, I-Min Lee, Mark Hamer, Emmanuel Stamatakis

Abstract

More research is required to clarify the association between physical activity and health in "weekend warriors" who perform all their exercise in 1 or 2 sessions per week. To investigate associations between the weekend warrior and other physical activity patterns and the risks for all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and cancer mortality. This pooled analysis of household-based surveillance studies included 11 cohorts of respondents to the Health Survey for England and Scottish Health Survey with prospective linkage to mortality records. Respondents 40 years or older were included in the analysis. Data were collected from 1994 to 2012 and analyzed in 2016. Self-reported leisure time physical activity, with activity patterns defined as inactive (reporting no moderate- or vigorous-intensity activities), insufficiently active (reporting <150 min/wk in moderate-intensity and <75 min/wk in vigorous-intensity activities), weekend warrior (reporting ≥150 min/wk in moderate-intensity or ≥75 min/wk in vigorous-intensity activities from 1 or 2 sessions), and regularly active (reporting ≥150 min/wk in moderate-intensity or ≥75 min/wk in vigorous-intensity activities from ≥3 sessions). The insufficiently active participants were also characterized by physical activity frequency. All-cause, CVD, and cancer mortality ascertained from death certificates. Among the 63 591 adult respondents (45.9% male; 44.1% female; mean [SD] age, 58.6 [11.9] years), 8802 deaths from all causes, 2780 deaths from CVD, and 2526 from cancer occurred during 561 159 person-years of follow-up. Compared with the inactive participants, the hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.62-0.72) in insufficiently active participants who reported 1 to 2 sessions per week, 0.70 (95% CI, 0.60-0.82) in weekend warrior participants, and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.58-0.73) in regularly active participants. Compared with the inactive participants, the HR for CVD mortality was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.52-0.69) in insufficiently active participants who reported 1 or 2 sessions per week, 0.60 (95% CI, 0.45-0.82) in weekend warrior participants, and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.48-0.73) in regularly active participants. Compared with the inactive participants, the HR for cancer mortality was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.73-0.94) in insufficiently active participants who reported 1 or 2 sessions per week, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.63-1.06) in weekend warrior participants, and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.66-0.94) in regularly active participants. Weekend warrior and other leisure time physical activity patterns characterized by 1 or 2 sessions per week may be sufficient to reduce all-cause, CVD, and cancer mortality risks regardless of adherence to prevailing physical activity guidelines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,408 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 425 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 3 <1%
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 410 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 60 14%
Student > Bachelor 55 13%
Student > Master 53 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 12%
Other 34 8%
Other 101 24%
Unknown 70 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 142 33%
Sports and Recreations 74 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 3%
Psychology 14 3%
Other 55 13%
Unknown 99 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3014. 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 20 July 2021.
All research outputs
#1,132
of 18,374,253 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Internal Medicine
#16
of 4,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18
of 399,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Internal Medicine
#2
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,374,253 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 4,544 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 146.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 399,064 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 125 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 99% of its contemporaries.