↓ Skip to main content

Variations in Hypoxia Impairs Muscle Oxygenation and Performance during Simulated Team-Sport Running

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Variations in Hypoxia Impairs Muscle Oxygenation and Performance during Simulated Team-Sport Running
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00080
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice J. Sweeting, François Billaut, Matthew C. Varley, Ramón F. Rodriguez, William G. Hopkins, Robert J. Aughey

Abstract

Purpose: To quantify the effect of acute hypoxia on muscle oxygenation and power during simulated team-sport running. Methods: Seven individuals performed repeated and single sprint efforts, embedded in a simulated team-sport running protocol, on a non-motorized treadmill in normoxia (sea-level), and acute normobaric hypoxia (simulated altitudes of 2,000 and 3,000 m). Mean and peak power was quantified during all sprints and repeated sprints. Mean total work, heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, and quadriceps muscle deoxyhaemoglobin concentration (assessed via near-infrared spectroscopy) were measured over the entire protocol. A linear mixed model was used to estimate performance and physiological effects across each half of the protocol. Changes were expressed in standardized units for assessment of magnitude. Uncertainty in the changes was expressed as a 90% confidence interval and interpreted via non-clinical magnitude-based inference. Results: Mean total work was reduced at 2,000 m (-10%, 90% confidence limits ±6%) and 3,000 m (-15%, ±5%) compared with sea-level. Mean heart rate was reduced at 3,000 m compared with 2,000 m (-3, ±3 min(-1)) and sea-level (-3, ±3 min(-1)). Blood oxygen saturation was lower at 2,000 m (-8, ±3%) and 3,000 m (-15, ±2%) compared with sea-level. Sprint mean power across the entire protocol was reduced at 3,000 m compared with 2,000 m (-12%, ±3%) and sea-level (-14%, ±4%). In the second half of the protocol, sprint mean power was reduced at 3,000 m compared to 2,000 m (-6%, ±4%). Sprint mean peak power across the entire protocol was lowered at 2,000 m (-10%, ±6%) and 3,000 m (-16%, ±6%) compared with sea-level. During repeated sprints, mean peak power was lower at 2,000 m (-8%, ±7%) and 3,000 m (-8%, ±7%) compared with sea-level. In the second half of the protocol, repeated sprint mean power was reduced at 3,000 m compared to 2,000 m (-7%, ±5%) and sea-level (-9%, ±5%). Quadriceps muscle deoxyhaemoglobin concentration was lowered at 3,000 m compared to 2,000 m (-10, ±12%) and sea-level (-11, ±12%). Conclusions: Simulated team-sport running is impaired at 3,000 m compared to 2,000 m and sea-level, likely due to a higher muscle deoxygenation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Professor 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 18 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 17 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 18 March 2017.
All research outputs
#5,896,440
of 24,164,942 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,689
of 14,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,759
of 429,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#65
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,164,942 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 429,797 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 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.