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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Abdominal Binding Improves Neuromuscular Efficiency of the Human Diaphragm during Exercise
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2017.00345 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sara J. Abdallah, David S. Chan, Robin Glicksman, Cassandra T. Mendonca, Yuanming Luo, Jean Bourbeau, Benjamin M. Smith, Dennis Jensen |
| Abstract |
We tested the hypothesis that elastic binding of the abdomen (AB) would enhance neuromuscular efficiency of the human diaphragm during exercise. Twelve healthy non-obese men aged 24.8 ± 1.7 years (mean ± SE) completed a symptom-limited constant-load cycle endurance exercise test at 85% of their peak incremental power output with diaphragmatic electromyography (EMGdi) and respiratory pressure measurements under two randomly assigned conditions: unbound control (CTRL) and AB sufficient to increase end-expiratory gastric pressure (Pga,ee) by 5-8 cmH2O at rest. By design, AB increased Pga,ee by 6.6 ± 0.6 cmH2O at rest. Compared to CTRL, AB significantly increased the transdiaphragmatic pressure swing-to-EMGdi ratio by 85-95% during exercise, reflecting enhanced neuromuscular efficiency of the diaphragm. By contrast, AB had no effect on spirometric parameters at rest, exercise endurance time or an effect on cardiac, metabolic, ventilatory, breathing pattern, dynamic operating lung volume, and perceptual responses during exercise. In conclusion, AB was associated with isolated and acute improvements in neuromuscular efficiency of the diaphragm during exercise in healthy men. The implications of our results are that AB may be an effective means of enhancing neuromuscular efficiency of the diaphragm in clinical populations with diaphragmatic weakness/dysfunction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 8% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 19 | 51% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,999,131
of 23,628,742 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,270
of 14,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,159
of 317,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#73
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,628,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 317,337 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 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.