↓ Skip to main content

The differential effects of a complex protein drink versus isocaloric carbohydrate drink on performance indices following high-intensity resistance training: a two arm crossover design

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, June 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 (96th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
28 tweeters
facebook
11 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The differential effects of a complex protein drink versus isocaloric carbohydrate drink on performance indices following high-intensity resistance training: a two arm crossover design
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1550-2783-10-31
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shannan Lynch

Abstract

Post-workout nutrient timing and macronutrient selection are essential for recovery, glycogen replenishment and muscle protein synthesis (MPS). Performance repeatability, particularly after strenuous activity, can be influenced by substrate availability, recovery markers and perceived rate of exertion. This study compared the differential effects of a complex protein ready-to-drink beverage (VPX) and isocaloric carbohydrate beverage (iCHO) on performance-agility T-test, push-up test, 40-yard sprint, and rate of perceived exertion (RPE), following high-intensity resistance training (HIRT).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 26%
Student > Bachelor 14 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Researcher 6 10%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 28 48%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Unspecified 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Other 8 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#350,449
of 12,443,702 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#143
of 634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,608
of 147,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,443,702 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 147,350 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.