↓ Skip to main content

The forgotten guidelines: cross-sectional analysis of participation in muscle strengthening and balance

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2016
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
15 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
152 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
The forgotten guidelines: cross-sectional analysis of participation in muscle strengthening and balance & co-ordination activities by adults and older adults in Scotland
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3774-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tessa Strain, Claire Fitzsimons, Paul Kelly, Nanette Mutrie

Abstract

In 2011, the UK physical activity guidelines were updated to include recommendations for muscle strengthening and balance & coordination (at least two sessions of relevant activities per week). However, monitoring and policy efforts remain focussed on aerobic activity. This study aimed to assess differences by gender and age in the a) prevalence of muscle strengthening and balance & co-ordination guidelines, and b) participation in guideline-specific activities. The sample for the muscle strengthening analyses was 10,488 adult (16-64 years) and 3857 older adult (≥65 years) 2012-2014 Scottish Health Survey respondents. The balance & co-ordination analyses used only the older adult responses. Differences by gender and (where possible) age in guideline prevalence and activity participation were assessed using logistic regression and t-tests. Thirty-one percent of men and 24 % of women met the muscle strengthening guideline, approximately half that of published figures for aerobic physical activity. Nineteen percent of older men and 12 % of older women met the balance & co-ordination guidelines. The oldest age groups were less likely to meet both guidelines compared to the youngest age groups. Differences by gender were only evident for muscle strengthening: more men met the guidelines than women in all age groups, with the largest difference amongst 16-24 year olds (55 % men compared with 40 % women). Participation in relevant activities differed by gender for both guidelines. 'Workout at gym' was the most popular activity to improve muscle strength for men (18 % participated), while swimming was for women (15 % participated). Golf was the most popular activity to improve balance & co-ordination for older men (11 % participated) and aerobics was for older women (6 % participated). Participation decreased in most muscle strengthening activities for both men and women. One exception was golf, where participation levels were as high amongst older men as in younger age groups, although overall levels were low (3 % of all men). Physical activity policy should aim to increase prevalence of these 'forgotten' guidelines, particularly amongst young women (for muscle strengthening) and older age groups (both guidelines). Gender and age participation differences should be considered when designing population-level interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 152 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 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 164 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 16%
Student > Master 19 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Researcher 11 7%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 53 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 32 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 60 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 211. 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 15 November 2022.
All research outputs
#188,702
of 25,853,983 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#173
of 17,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,640
of 325,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#6
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,853,983 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 17,880 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. 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 325,449 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 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 97% of its contemporaries.