↓ Skip to main content

Physiological and Nutritional Aspects of Post-Exercise Recovery

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
45 tweeters


30 Dimensions

Readers on

263 Mendeley
Physiological and Nutritional Aspects of Post-Exercise Recovery
Published in
Sports Medicine, October 2011
DOI 10.2165/11593180-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID

Christophe Hausswirth, Yann Le Meur


Gender-based differences in the physiological response to exercise have been studied extensively for the last four decades, and yet the study of post-exercise, gender-specific recovery has only been developing in more recent years. This review of the literature aims to present the current state of knowledge in this field, focusing on some of the most pertinent aspects of physiological recovery in female athletes and how metabolic, thermoregulatory, or inflammation and repair processes may differ from those observed in male athletes. Scientific investigations on the effect of gender on substrate utilization during exercise have yielded conflicting results. Factors contributing to the lack of agreement between studies include differences in subject dietary or training status, exercise intensity or duration, as well as the variations in ovarian hormone concentrations between different menstrual cycle phases in female subjects, as all are known to affect substrate metabolism during sub-maximal exercise. If greater fatty acid mobilization occurs in females during prolonged exercise compared with males, the inverse is observed during the recovery phase. This could explain why, despite mobilizing lipids to a greater extent than males during exercise, females lose less fat mass than their male counterparts over the course of a physical training programme. Where nutritional strategies are concerned, no difference appears between males and females in their capacity to replenish glycogen stores; optimal timing for carbohydrate intake does not differ between genders, and athletes must consume carbohydrates as soon as possible after exercise in order to maximize glycogen store repletion. While lipid intake should be limited in the immediate post-exercise period in order to favour carbohydrate and protein intake, in the scope of the athlete's general diet, lipid intake should be maintained at an adequate level (30%). This is particularly important for females specializing in long-duration events. With protein balance, it has been shown that a negative nitrogen balance is more often observed in female athletes than in male athletes. It is therefore especially important to ensure that this remains the case during periods of caloric restriction, especially when working with female athletes showing a tendency to limit their caloric intake on a daily basis. In the post-exercise period, females display lower thermolytic capacities than males. Therefore, the use of cooling recovery methods following exercise, such as cold water immersion or the use of a cooling vest, appear particularly beneficial for female athletes. In addition, a greater decrease in arterial blood pressure is observed after exercise in females than in males. Given that the return to homeostasis after a brief intense exercise appears linked to maintaining good venous return, it is conceivable that female athletes would find a greater advantage to active recovery modes than males. This article reviews some of the major gender differences in the metabolic, inflammatory and thermoregulatory response to exercise and its subsequent recovery. Particular attention is given to the identification of which recovery strategies may be the most pertinent to the design of training programmes for athletic females, in order to optimize the physiological adaptations sought for improving performance and maintaining health.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Brazil 3 1%
Canada 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 247 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 70 27%
Student > Bachelor 55 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 14%
Researcher 20 8%
Unspecified 17 6%
Other 63 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 119 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 13%
Unspecified 22 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 7%
Other 22 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,570,048 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
of 2,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 98,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,570,048 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 98,015 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.