↓ Skip to main content

Training in ChiRunning to reduce blood pressure: a randomized controlled pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 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
Training in ChiRunning to reduce blood pressure: a randomized controlled pilot study
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12906-015-0895-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly McDermott, Deepak Kumar, Veronica Goldman, Haojun Feng, Wolf Mehling, Judith T. Moskowitz, Richard B. Souza, Frederick M. Hecht

Abstract

People with prehypertension (120-130/80-90 mmHg) are at increased risk of progressing to hypertension. Recommendations for prehypertension include engaging in regular physical activity. We aimed to assess feasibility and acceptability and collect preliminary outcome data on ChiRunning for people with elevated blood pressure. ChiRunning is a commercially available running program based on the mindful movements of Tai Chi, which is aimed at decreasing injury by both increasing body awareness and modifying running form. We enrolled adults with elevated systolic (130-150 mmHg) or diastolic (80-100 mmHg) blood pressure in a 12-week pilot trial. Participants were randomized 2:1:1 to 8 weeks of: 1) intervention-a trainer-led ChiRunning group (n = 10); 2) active control-a trainer-led running group (n = 6); or 3) educational control-a self-directed running group (n = 6) and followed for 4 more weeks. The active control and educational control groups were combined for analysis. This study was feasible, meeting recruitment, retention and adherence goals, and acceptable to participants. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure did not change significantly over the study for either the ChiRunning or control groups. Changes in BMI over time were significantly different from zero in the ChiRunning group (p = 0.04) but not in the control group (slope for ChiRunning -0.05 [-0.1 to -0.002] vs. control -0.01 [-0.06 to 0.04], between slope difference, p = 0.22). Self-reported running-related injury (i.e. discomfort leading to a decrease in running) was similar between groups (ChiRunning, 4 [1.2 to 8.4] vs. control, 3 [0.7 to 7.1] injuries per 100 h of running, p = 0.72) although self-reported running-related discomfort (i.e. discomfort that does not lead to changes in running) trended higher in the ChiRunning group (ChiRunning, 10 [5.4 to 16.8] vs. control, 4 [1.5 to 9] reports of discomfort per 100 h of running, p = 0.06). ChiRunning appears to be a feasible and acceptable exercise program for people with elevated blood pressure. We did not find that ChiRunning had a significant impact on blood pressure or self reported injury, but did see a positive change in BMI over time. ChiRunning warrants further investigation in a larger trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01587183.

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 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 137 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 17%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Other 10 7%
Researcher 10 7%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 40 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 17%
Sports and Recreations 14 10%
Psychology 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 45 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,263,565
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#406
of 3,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,785
of 279,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#6
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 279,238 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 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 92% of its contemporaries.