↓ Skip to main content

Prime Time Light Exposures Do Not Seem to Improve Maximal Physical Performance in Male Elite Athletes, but Enhance End-Spurt Performance

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Prime Time Light Exposures Do Not Seem to Improve Maximal Physical Performance in Male Elite Athletes, but Enhance End-Spurt Performance
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00264
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raphael Knaier, Juliane Schäfer, Anja Rossmeissl, Christopher Klenk, Henner Hanssen, Christoph Höchsmann, Christian Cajochen, Arno Schmidt-Trucksäss

Abstract

Many sports competitions take place during television prime time, a time of the day when many athletes have already exceeded their time of peak performance. We assessed the effect of different light exposure modalities on physical performance and melatonin levels in athletes during prime time. Seventy-two young, male elite athletes with a median (interquartile range) age of 23 (21; 29) years and maximum oxygen uptake (VO2max) of 63 (58; 66) ml/kg/min were randomly assigned to three different light exposure groups: bright light (BRIGHT), blue monochromatic light (BLUE), and control light (CONTROL). Each light exposure lasted 60 min and was scheduled to start 17 h after each individual's midpoint of sleep (median time: 9:17 pm). Immediately after light exposure, a 12-min time trial was performed on a bicycle ergometer. The test supervisor and participants were blinded to the light condition each participant was exposed to. The median received light intensities and peak wavelengths (photopic lx/nm) measured at eye level were 1319/545 in BRIGHT, 203/469 in BLUE, and 115/545 in CONTROL. In a multivariate analysis adjusted for individual VO2max, total work performed in 12 min did not significantly differ between the three groups. The amount of exposure to non-image forming light was positively associated with the performance gain during the time trial, defined as the ratio of the work performed in the first and last minute of the time trial, and with stronger melatonin suppression. Specifically, a tenfold increase in the exposure to melanopic light was associated with a performance gain of 8.0% (95% confidence interval: 2.6, 13.3; P = 0.004) and a melatonin decrease of -0.9 pg/ml (95% confidence interval: -1.5, -0.3; P = 0.006). Exposure to bright or blue light did not significantly improve maximum cycling performance in a 12-min all-out time trial. However, it is noteworthy that the estimated difference of 4.1 kJ between BRIGHT and CONTROL might represent an important performance advantage justifying further studies. In conclusion, we report novel evidence that evening light exposure, which strongly impacts the human circadian timing system, enables elite athletes to better maintain performance across a 12-min cycling time trial.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 24 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 16 20%
Psychology 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 14 June 2022.
All research outputs
#435,315
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#221
of 13,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,291
of 309,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#11
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,461 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 309,918 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 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 95% of its contemporaries.