↓ Skip to main content

Kinetic and kinematic differences between deadlifts and goodmornings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 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
Kinetic and kinematic differences between deadlifts and goodmornings
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/2052-1847-5-27
Pubmed ID
Authors

Florian Schellenberg, Julia Lindorfer, Renate List, William R Taylor, Silvio Lorenzetti

Abstract

In order to improve training performance, as well as avoid overloading during prevention and rehabilitation exercises in patients, the aim of this study was to understand the biomechanical differences in the knee, hip and the back between the exercises "Goodmornings" (GMs) and "Deadlifts" (DLs).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 150 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 35 23%
Student > Master 25 16%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Researcher 10 7%
Other 33 22%
Unknown 28 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 52 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 12%
Engineering 5 3%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 38 25%
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 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,047,316
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#244
of 680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,893
of 319,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 319,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 3 of them.