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 |
Does functional fitness decline in accordance with our expectation? – a pilot study in healthy female
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13102-015-0012-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yin-Shin Lee, Li-Ying Chang, Wei-Hsuan Chung, Tsung-Ching Lin, Tzyy-Yuang Shiang |
| Abstract |
Aging may cause various functional abilities gradually deteriorate. With changes in social forms, the trend of functional fitness decline will change accordingly. Therefore, this study endeavored to identify the trends in functional fitness decline by comparing the differences in the functional fitness of females in various age groups. Thirty six healthy females were divided into 3 age groups: young healthy females (20 to 30 y); middle-age (45 to 55 y); and older (65 to 75 y). Functional fitness test battery included flexibility, muscle strength/endurance, aerobic endurance, balance and agility. The performance in the elderly group was significantly worse (P < .05) in all the tests, whereas the muscle strength and endurance, as well as aerobic endurance for the middle-age group showed significantly lower than young groups (P < .05). The reduction in lower extremity muscle strength occurs in the middle-age group. We recommend that middle-age women be conscious of the reduction in their lower extremity muscle strength and conduct advanced preparations for future aging. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 60% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 21% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 10 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 30 September 2015.
All research outputs
#5,795,064
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#169
of 534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,192
of 265,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 265,361 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.