The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Which ROMs Lead to Rome? A Systematic Review of the Effects of Range of Motion on Muscle Hypertrophy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, January 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1519/jsc.0000000000004415 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Witalo Kassiano, Bruna Costa, João Pedro Nunes, Alex S. Ribeiro, Brad J. Schoenfeld, Edilson S. Cyrino |
| Abstract |
Kassiano, W, Costa, B, Nunes, JP, Ribeiro, AS, Schoenfeld, BJ, and Cyrino, ES. Which ROMs lead to Rome? a systematic review of the effects of range of motion on muscle hypertrophy. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2022-Resistance exercise range of motion (ROM) influences muscular adaptations. However, there are no consistent practical guidelines about the optimal ROM for maximizing muscle hypertrophy. The objective of this article was to systematically review the literature for studies that compared the effects of full ROM (fROM) and partial ROM (pROM) on muscle hypertrophy. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify articles from the earliest record up to and including April 2022. We calculated the effect size (ES) scores of the variables of interest. Eleven studies were included in the review. Full ROM and pROM performed in the initial part of the ROM elicited greater muscle hypertrophy of the rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, biceps brachii, and brachialis distal sites (between-groups ES: 0.20-0.90) than pROM performed in the final part of the ROM. fROM elicited greater muscle growth on the gluteus maximus and adductors than pROM in the final part of the ROM (between-groups ES: 0.24-0.25). Initial pROM produced more favorable proximal rectus femoris hypertrophy than fROM (between-groups ES: 0.35-0.38). pROM in the middle part of the ROM elicited greater triceps brachii hypertrophy than fROM (between-group ES: 1.21). In conclusion, evidence suggests that when training at a longer muscle length-through either pROM or fROM-some muscles, such as quadriceps femoris, biceps brachii, and triceps brachii, tend to experience optimal growth. Thus, the use pROM in the initial part of the excursion in combination with fROM training should be considered when prescribing hypertrophy-oriented resistance training programs. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 5 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 57 | 77% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 53 | 72% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 11 | 15% |
| Scientists | 9 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 31 | 57% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 13 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 30 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. 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 12 July 2024.
All research outputs
#601,174
of 26,558,784 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#339
of 6,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,843
of 492,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#3
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,558,784 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,793 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 492,949 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 75 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 96% of its contemporaries.