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 |
The Yo-Yo Intermittent Tests: A Systematic Review and Structured Compendium of Test Results
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2018.00870 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Boris Schmitz, Carina Pfeifer, Kiana Kreitz, Matthias Borowski, Andreas Faldum, Stefan-Martin Brand |
| Abstract |
Background: Although Yo-Yo intermittent tests are frequently used in a variety of sports and research studies to determine physical fitness, no structured reference exists for comparison and rating of test results. This systematic review of the most common Yo-Yo tests aimed to provide reference values for test results by statistical aggregation of published data. Methods: A systematic literature search for articles published until August 2017 was performed in MEDLINE, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus and Google Scholar. Original reports on healthy females and males ≥16 years were eligible for the analysis. Sub-maximal test versions and the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 1 Children's test (YYIR1C) were not included. Results: 248 studies with 9,440 participants were included in the structured analysis. The Yo-Yo test types most frequently used were the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 1 (YYIR1, 57.7%), the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 2 (YYIR2, 28.0%), the Yo-Yo Intermittent Endurance Level 2 (YYIE2, 11.4%), and the Yo-Yo Intermittent Endurance Level 1 (YYIE1, 2.9%) test. For each separate test, reference values (global means and percentiles) for sports at different levels and both genders were calculated. Conclusions: Our analysis provides evidence that Yo-Yo intermittent tests reference values differ with respect to the type and level of sport performed.The presented results may be used by practitioners, trainers and athletes to rate Yo-Yo intermittent test performance levels and monitor training effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
| Colombia | 2 | 5% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Chile | 1 | 3% |
| Argentina | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 59% |
| Scientists | 11 | 30% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 343 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 343 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 62 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 45 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 8% |
| Researcher | 22 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 53 | 15% |
| Unknown | 121 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 141 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 16 | 5% |
| Unknown | 135 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 13 August 2018.
All research outputs
#1,608,455
of 23,700,294 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#858
of 14,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,336
of 328,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#66
of 517 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,700,294 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 328,601 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 517 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.