↓ Skip to main content

Enhanced aerobic exercise performance in women by a combination of three mineral Chelates plus two conditionally essential nutrients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
Enhanced aerobic exercise performance in women by a combination of three mineral Chelates plus two conditionally essential nutrients
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
DOI 10.1186/s12970-017-0199-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert A. DiSilvestro, Staci Hart, Trisha Marshall, Elizabeth Joseph, Alyssa Reau, Carmen B. Swain, Jason Diehl

Abstract

Certain essential and conditionally essential nutrients (CENs) perform functions involved in aerobic exercise performance. However, increased intake of such nutrient combinations has not actually been shown to improve such performance. For 1 mo, aerobically fit, young adult women took either a combination of 3 mineral glycinate complexes (daily dose: 36 mg iron, 15 mg zinc, and 2 mg copper) + 2 CENs (daily dose: 2 g carnitine and 400 mg phosphatidylserine), or the same combination with generic mineral complexes, or placebo (n = 14/group). In Trial 1, before and after 1 mo, subjects were tested for 3 mile run time (primary outcome), followed by distance covered in 25 min on a stationary bike (secondary outcome), followed by a 90 s step test (secondary outcome). To test reproducibility of the run results, and to examine a lower dose of carnitine, a second trial was done. New subjects took either mineral glycinates + CENs (1 g carnitine) or placebo (n = 17/group); subjects were tested for pre- and post-treatment 3 mile run time (primary outcome). In Trial 1, the mineral glycinates + CENs decreased 3 mile run time (25.6 ± 2.4 vs 26.5 ± 2.3 min, p < 0.05, paired t-test) increased stationary bike distance after 25 min (6.5 ± 0.6 vs 6.0 ± 0.8 miles, p < 0.05, paired t-test), and increased steps in the step test (43.8 ± 4.8 vs 40.3 ± 6.4 steps, p < 0.05, paired t-test). The placebo significantly affected only the biking distance, but it was less than for the glycinates-CENs treatment (0.2 ± 0.4. vs 0.5 ± 0.1 miles, p < 0.05, ANOVA + Tukey). The generic minerals + CENs only significantly affected the step test (44.1 ± 5.2 vs 41.0 ± 5.9 steps, p < 0.05, paired t-test) In Trial 2, 3 mile run time was decreased for the mineral glycinates + CENs (23.9 ± 3.1 vs 24.7 ± 2.5, p < 0.005, paired t-test), but not by the placebo. All changes for Test Formula II or III were high compared to placebo (1.9 to 4.9, Cohen's D), and high for Test Formula II vs I for running and biking (3.2 & 3.5, Cohen's D). In summary, a combination of certain mineral complexes plus two CENs improved aerobic exercise performance in fit young adult women.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 19%
Student > Master 11 13%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 22 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 21%
Sports and Recreations 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Unspecified 3 3%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 25 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 104. 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 31 August 2023.
All research outputs
#380,805
of 24,357,902 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#126
of 923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,512
of 432,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#123
of 850 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,357,902 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 62.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 432,653 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 850 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.