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 |
Herbs in exercise and sports
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Physiological Anthropology, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1880-6805-31-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chee Keong Chen, Ayu Suzailiana Muhamad, Foong Kiew Ooi |
| Abstract |
The use of herbs as ergogenic aids in exercise and sport is not novel. Ginseng, caffeine, ma huang (also called 'Chinese ephedra'), ephedrine and a combination of both caffeine and ephedrine are the most popular herbs used in exercise and sports. It is believed that these herbs have an ergogenic effect and thus help to improve physical performance. Numerous studies have been conducted to investigate the effects of these herbs on exercise performance. Recently, researchers have also investigated the effects of Eurycoma longifolia Jack on endurance cycling and running performance. These investigators have reported no significant improvement in either cycling or running endurance after supplementation with this herb. As the number of studies in this area is still small, more studies should be conducted to evaluate and substantiate the effects of this herb on sports and exercise performance. For instance, future research on any herbs should take the following factors into consideration: dosage, supplementation period and a larger sample size. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 174 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 18% |
| Researcher | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 33 | 18% |
| Unknown | 41 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 28 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 49 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 14 March 2021.
All research outputs
#4,535,152
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physiological Anthropology
#110
of 451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,222
of 168,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physiological Anthropology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 451 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 168,682 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.