↓ Skip to main content

The feasibility of progressive resistance training in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
212 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 feasibility of progressive resistance training in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a pilot randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13102-016-0039-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Vizza, Caroline A. Smith, Soji Swaraj, Kingsley Agho, Birinder S. Cheema

Abstract

To evaluate the feasibility of executing a randomized controlled trial of progressive resistance training (PRT) in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Women with PCOS were randomized to an experimental (PRT) group or a no-exercise (usual care) control group. The PRT group was prescribed two supervised and two unsupervised (home-based) training sessions per week for 12 weeks. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and attrition, adherence, adverse events, and completion of assessments. Secondary outcomes, collected pre and post intervention, included a range of pertinent physiological, functional and psychological measures. Fifteen participants were randomised into the PRT group (n = 8) or control group (n = 7); five women (n = 2 in PRT group and n = 3 in control group) withdrew from the study. The most successful recruitment sources were Facebook (40 %) and online advertisement (27 %), while least successful methods were referrals by clinicians, colleagues and flyers. In the PRT group, attendance to supervised sessions was higher (95 %; standard deviation ±6 %) compared to unsupervised sessions (51 %; standard deviation ±28 %). No adverse events were attributed to PRT. Change in menstrual cycle status was not significantly different between groups over time (p = 0.503). However, the PRT group significantly increased body weight (p = 0.01), BMI (p = 0.04), lean mass (p = 0.01), fat-free mass (p = 0.005) and lower body strength (p = 0.03), while reducing waist circumference (p = 0.03) and HbA1c (p = 0.033) versus the control group. The PRT group also significantly improved across several domains of disease-specific and general health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety and exercise self-efficacy. A randomized controlled trial of PRT in PCOS would be feasible, and this mode of exercise may elicit a therapeutic effect on clinically important outcomes in this cohort. The success of a large-scale trial required to confirm these findings would be contingent on addressing the feasibility hurdles identified in this study with respect to recruitment, attrition, compliance, and collection of standardized clinical data. Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; ACTRN12614000517673 Registered 15 May 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 212 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 212 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 12%
Student > Master 25 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Researcher 14 7%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 86 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 12%
Sports and Recreations 25 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 12%
Psychology 8 4%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 30 14%
Unknown 91 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 May 2016.
All research outputs
#19,292,491
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#450
of 534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,820
of 312,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 312,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.