↓ Skip to main content

The effects of replacing a portion of endurance training by explosive strength training on performance in trained cyclists

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, September 2001
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
The effects of replacing a portion of endurance training by explosive strength training on performance in trained cyclists
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, September 2001
DOI 10.1007/s004210100507
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Bastiaans, A. Diemen, T. Veneberg, A. Jeukendrup

Abstract

To investigate the effects of replacing a portion of endurance training by strength training on exercise performance, 14 competitive cyclists were divided into an experimental (E; n = 6) and a control (C; n = 8) group. Both groups received a training program of 9 weeks. The total training volume for both groups was the same [E: 8.8 (1.1) h/week; C: 8.9 (1.7) h/week], but 37% of training for E consisted of explosive-type strength training, whilst C received endurance training only. Simulated time trial performance (TT), short-term performance (STP), maximal workload (Wmax) and gross (GE) and delta efficiency (DE) were measured before, after 4 weeks and at the end of the training program (9 weeks). No significant group-by-training effects for the markers of endurance performance (TT and Wmax) were found after 9 weeks, although after 4 weeks, these markers had only increased (P < 0.05) in E. STP decreased (P < 0.05) in C, whereas no changes were observed in E. For DE, a significant group-by-training interaction (P < 0.05) was found, and for GE the group-by-training interaction was not significant. It is concluded that replacing a portion of endurance training by explosive strength training prevents a decrease in STP without compromising gains in endurance performance of trained cyclists.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 2%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 115 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 19%
Student > Bachelor 20 16%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Postgraduate 12 10%
Other 27 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 79 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 9%
Unspecified 7 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 11 9%

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 24 July 2017.
All research outputs
#10,213,823
of 11,511,689 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology
#2,480
of 2,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,406
of 262,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology
#41
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,511,689 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 262,498 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.