↓ Skip to main content

Is a threshold-based model a superior method to the relative percent concept for establishing individual exercise intensity? a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 422)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
44 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 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
Is a threshold-based model a superior method to the relative percent concept for establishing individual exercise intensity? a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13102-015-0011-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ali E. Wolpern, Dara J. Burgos, Jeffrey M. Janot, Lance C. Dalleck

Abstract

Exercise intensity is arguably the most critical component of the exercise prescription model. It has been suggested that a threshold based model for establishing exercise intensity might better identify the lowest effective training stimulus for all individuals with varying fitness levels; however, experimental evidence is lacking. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two exercise training programs for improving cardiorespiratory fitness: threshold based model vs. relative percent concept (i.e., % heart rate reserve - HRR). Apparently healthy, but sedentary men and women (n = 42) were randomized to a non-exercise control group or one of two exercise training groups. Exercise training was performed 30 min/day on 5 days/week for 12weeks according to one of two exercise intensity regimens: 1) a relative percent method was used in which intensity was prescribed according to percentages of heart rate reserve (HRR group), or 2) a threshold based method (ACE-3ZM) was used in which intensity was prescribed according to the first ventilatory threshold (VT1) and second ventilatory threshold (VT2). Thirty-six men and women completed the study. After 12weeks, VO2max increased significantly (p < 0.05 vs. controls) in both HRR (1.76 ± 1.93 mL/kg/min) and ACE-3ZM (3.93 ± 0.96 mL/kg/min) groups. Repeated measures ANOVA identified a significant interaction between exercise intensity method and change in VO2max values (F = 9.06, p < 0.05) indicating that VO2max responded differently to the method of exercise intensity prescription. In the HRR group 41.7 % (5/12) of individuals experienced a favorable change in relative VO2max (Δ > 5.9 %) and were categorized as responders. Alternatively, exercise training in the ACE-3ZM group elicited a positive improvement in relative VO2max (Δ > 5.9 %) in 100 % (12/12) of the individuals. A threshold based exercise intensity prescription: 1). elicited significantly (p < 0.05) greater improvements in VO2max, and 2). attenuated the individual variation in VO2max training responses when compared to relative percent exercise training. These novel findings are encouraging and provide important preliminary data for the design of individualized exercise prescriptions that will enhance training efficacy and limit training unresponsiveness. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: ID NCT02351713 Registered 30 January 2015.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Chile 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 140 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 19%
Student > Bachelor 21 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 14%
Researcher 11 8%
Other 8 6%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 28 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 60 41%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 36 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 19 March 2019.
All research outputs
#1,027,366
of 21,332,163 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#42
of 422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,191
of 245,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,332,163 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 245,482 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them