↓ Skip to main content

Same Performance Changes after Live High-Train Low in Normobaric vs. Hypobaric Hypoxia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, April 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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
32 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
Same Performance Changes after Live High-Train Low in Normobaric vs. Hypobaric Hypoxia
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00138
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonas J. Saugy, Laurent Schmitt, Anna Hauser, Guillaume Constantin, Roberto Cejuela, Raphael Faiss, Jon P. Wehrlin, Jérémie Rosset, Neil Robinson, Grégoire P. Millet

Abstract

We investigated the changes in physiological and performance parameters after a Live High-Train Low (LHTL) altitude camp in normobaric (NH) or hypobaric hypoxia (HH) to reproduce the actual training practices of endurance athletes using a crossover-designed study. Well-trained triathletes (n = 16) were split into two groups and completed two 18-day LTHL camps during which they trained at 1100-1200 m and lived at 2250 m (P i O2 = 111.9 ± 0.6 vs. 111.6 ± 0.6 mmHg) under NH (hypoxic chamber; FiO2 18.05 ± 0.03%) or HH (real altitude; barometric pressure 580.2 ± 2.9 mmHg) conditions. The subjects completed the NH and HH camps with a 1-year washout period. Measurements and protocol were identical for both phases of the crossover study. Oxygen saturation (S p O2) was constantly recorded nightly. P i O2 and training loads were matched daily. Blood samples and VO2max were measured before (Pre-) and 1 day after (Post-1) LHTL. A 3-km running-test was performed near sea level before and 1, 7, and 21 days after training camps. Total hypoxic exposure was lower for NH than for HH during LHTL (230 vs. 310 h; P < 0.001). Nocturnal S p O2 was higher in NH than in HH (92.4 ± 1.2 vs. 91.3 ± 1.0%, P < 0.001). VO2max increased to the same extent for NH and HH (4.9 ± 5.6 vs. 3.2 ± 5.1%). No difference was found in hematological parameters. The 3-km run time was significantly faster in both conditions 21 days after LHTL (4.5 ± 5.0 vs. 6.2 ± 6.4% for NH and HH), and no difference between conditions was found at any time. Increases in VO2max and performance enhancement were similar between NH and HH conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 100 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Student > Master 10 10%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 31 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 46 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 33 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 09 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,020,429
of 25,138,857 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,113
of 15,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,184
of 305,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#16
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,138,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 305,493 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.