↓ Skip to main content

Effects of multimodal agility-like exercise training compared to inactive controls and alternative training on physical performance in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Effects of multimodal agility-like exercise training compared to inactive controls and alternative training on physical performance in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, February 2021
DOI 10.1186/s11556-021-00256-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mareike Morat, Tobias Morat, Wiebren Zijlstra, Lars Donath

Abstract

Multimodal exercise training (MT) as a time-efficient training modality promotes a wide range of physical dimensions. Incorporating agility-like training aspects (coordination, changes of direction and velocity) into MT may further enhance physical outcomes highly relevant for activities of daily living. This meta-analysis investigated the effects of multimodal agility-like exercise training (MAT) on physical and cognitive performance compared to inactive (IC) and active controls (AC) in older adults. Literature search was conducted in four health-related databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science). Randomized controlled trials with pre-post testing applying MAT (including aspects of training with at least two different traditional domains: strength, balance, endurance) and an agility-like component in community-dwelling older adults were screened for eligibility. Standardized mean differences (SMD) adjusting for small sample sizes (hedges' g) were used to extract main outcomes (strength, gait, balance, mobility, endurance, cognition). Statistical analysis was conducted using a random effects inverse-variance model. Twenty trials with 1632 older adults were included. All effects were significantly in favour of MAT compared to IC: Strength, mobility and endurance revealed large overall effects (SMD: 0.88, 0.84, 1.82). Balance showed moderate effects (SMD: 0.6). Small overall effects were observed for gait (SMD: 0.41). Few data were available to compare MAT vs. AC with negligible or small effects in favour of MAT. Funnel plots did not reveal clear funnel shapes, indicating a potential risk of bias. MAT may serve as a time-efficient training modality to induce positive effects in different physical domains. Compared to isolated training, MAT allows equal effect sizes at lower overall training volumes. More studies are needed to investigate the potential value of MAT with systematic training and load control, especially compared to other exercise-based interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 37 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 17 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Psychology 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 42 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 March 2021.
All research outputs
#13,558,274
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from European Review of Aging and Physical Activity
#83
of 166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,705
of 421,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Review of Aging and Physical Activity
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 166 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 421,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.