↓ Skip to main content

Reducing sitting time versus adding exercise: differential effects on biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and metabolic risk

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, June 2018
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
149 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 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
Reducing sitting time versus adding exercise: differential effects on biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and metabolic risk
Published in
Scientific Reports, June 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-26616-w
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernard M. F. M. Duvivier, Johanne E. Bolijn, Annemarie Koster, Casper G. Schalkwijk, Hans H. C. M. Savelberg, Nicolaas C. Schaper

Abstract

Recent studies suggest that substituting sitting with light physical activity has beneficial metabolic effects, but it is unclear if this is associated with parallel changes in endothelial function. Data from three randomized cross-over studies were analyzed, in which 61 subjects (with normal weight, overweight and type 2 diabetes) followed different activity regimens (Sit, SitLess and/or Exercise) of four days each. Subjects were instructed to sit 14 h/day ('Sit'), to substitute 1 h/day of sitting with moderate-to-vigorous cycling ('Exercise') or to substitute 5-6 h/day sitting with light-intensity walking and standing ('SitLess'). Physical activity was assessed 24 h/day by accelerometry (ActivPAL) and diet was standardized. Fasted circulating biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction, lipids and insulin sensitivity were assessed the morning after each activity regimen. The endothelial dysfunction score (ED-score) was computed by averaging the Z-scores of the circulating biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction. Compared to Sit, Exercise resulted in lower ED-score, sICAM1 and sE-selectin (p < 0.05), while no significant changes were observed after SitLess. The ED-score, sVCAM1 and sE-selectin were lower after Exercise compared to SitLess (p < 0.05). In contrast, compared to Sit, insulin sensitivity (HOMA2-IR) and plasma lipids (HDL-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol, total cholesterol and Apo B) did not change significantly after Exercise but were improved after SitLess (p < 0.05). In conclusion, light physical activity and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity had a differential effect on risk markers of cardio-metabolic health and suggest the need of both performing structured exercise as well as reducing sitting time on a daily basis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 149 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 146 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 16%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Student > Master 13 9%
Other 9 6%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 52 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 12%
Sports and Recreations 17 12%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 61 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 136. 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 21 October 2018.
All research outputs
#303,860
of 25,366,663 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#3,474
of 139,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,722
of 336,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#78
of 3,557 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,366,663 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 139,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 336,981 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,557 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 97% of its contemporaries.