The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 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 |
Is recovery driven by central or peripheral factors? A role for the brain in recovery following intermittent-sprint exercise
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2014.00024 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Geoffrey M. Minett, Rob Duffield |
| Abstract |
Prolonged intermittent-sprint exercise (i.e., team sports) induce disturbances in skeletal muscle structure and function that are associated with reduced contractile function, a cascade of inflammatory responses, perceptual soreness, and a delayed return to optimal physical performance. In this context, recovery from exercise-induced fatigue is traditionally treated from a peripheral viewpoint, with the regeneration of muscle physiology and other peripheral factors the target of recovery strategies. The direction of this research narrative on post-exercise recovery differs to the increasing emphasis on the complex interaction between both central and peripheral factors regulating exercise intensity during exercise performance. Given the role of the central nervous system (CNS) in motor-unit recruitment during exercise, it too may have an integral role in post-exercise recovery. Indeed, this hypothesis is indirectly supported by an apparent disconnect in time-course changes in physiological and biochemical markers resultant from exercise and the ensuing recovery of exercise performance. Equally, improvements in perceptual recovery, even withstanding the physiological state of recovery, may interact with both feed-forward/feed-back mechanisms to influence subsequent efforts. Considering the research interest afforded to recovery methodologies designed to hasten the return of homeostasis within the muscle, the limited focus on contributors to post-exercise recovery from CNS origins is somewhat surprising. Based on this context, the current review aims to outline the potential contributions of the brain to performance recovery after strenuous exercise. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 8 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 9% |
| United States | 5 | 8% |
| Canada | 3 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 3% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Iceland | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 29 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 39 | 61% |
| Scientists | 22 | 34% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 331 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 319 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 58 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 47 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 14% |
| Researcher | 42 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 57 | 17% |
| Unknown | 65 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 151 | 46% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 26 | 8% |
| Unknown | 69 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 292. 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 24 May 2018.
All research outputs
#126,533
of 26,372,008 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#71
of 15,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,052
of 323,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#2
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,372,008 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 323,133 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 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 98% of its contemporaries.