↓ Skip to main content

Influence of Prior Intense Exercise and Cold Water Immersion in Recovery for Performance and Physiological Response during Subsequent Exercise

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Influence of Prior Intense Exercise and Cold Water Immersion in Recovery for Performance and Physiological Response during Subsequent Exercise
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00269
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter M. Christensen, Jens Bangsbo

Abstract

Athletes in intense endurance sports (e.g., 4000-m track cycling) often perform maximally (~4 min) twice a day due to qualifying and finals being placed on the same day. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate repeated performance on the same day in a competitive setting (part A) and the influence from prior intense exercise on subsequent performance and physiological response to moderate and maximal exercise with and without the use of cold water immersion (CWI) in recovery (part B). In part A, performance times during eight World championships for male track cyclists were extracted from the qualifying and final races in 4000-m individual pursuit. In part B, twelve trained cyclists with an average (±SD) ⩒O2-peak of 67 ± 5 mL/min/kg performed a protocol mimicking a qualifying race (QUAL) followed 3 h later by a performance test (PT) with each exercise period encompassing intense exercise for ~4 min preceded by an identical warm-up period in both a control setting (CON) and using cold water immersion in recovery (CWI; 15 min at 15°C). Performance was lowered (P < 0.001) from qualification to finals (259 ± 3 vs. 261 ± 3 s) for the track cyclists during World championships in part A. In part B, mean power in PT was not different in CWI relative to CON (406 ± 43 vs. 405 ± 38 W). Peak ⩒O2 (5.04 ± 0.50 vs. 5.00 ± 0.49 L/min) and blood lactate (13 ± 3 vs. 14 ± 3 mmol/L) did not differ between QUAL and PT and cycling economy and potassium handling was not impaired by prior intense exercise. In conclusion, performance is reduced with repeated maximal exercise in world-class track cyclists during 4000-m individual pursuit lasting ~4 min, however prior intense exercise do not appear to impair peak ⩒O2, peak lactate, cycling economy, or potassium handling in trained cyclists and CWI in recovery does not improve subsequent performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
France 1 1%
Unknown 72 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 7 9%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 34 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 20 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 28 July 2016.
All research outputs
#2,306,064
of 24,287,598 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,278
of 14,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,385
of 358,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#11
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,287,598 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,897 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 358,161 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 171 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 94% of its contemporaries.