↓ Skip to main content

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Assessing Cardiorespiratory Fitness of Soccer Players: Is Test Specificity the Issue?–A Review

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine - Open, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
Title
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Assessing Cardiorespiratory Fitness of Soccer Players: Is Test Specificity the Issue?–A Review
Published in
Sports Medicine - Open, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40798-018-0134-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monèm Jemni, Mohammad Shoaib Prince, Julien S. Baker

Abstract

It is important that players and coaches have access to objective information on soccer player's physical status for team selection and training purposes. Physiological tests can provide this information. Physiological testing in laboratories and field settings are very common, but both methods have been questioned because of their specificity and accuracy respectively. Currently, football players have their direct aerobic fitness assessed in laboratories using treadmills or cycle ergometers, whilst indirect measures (using estimation of aerobic performance) are performed in the field, typically comprising multiple shuttle runs back and forth over a set distance. The purpose of this review is to discuss the applied techniques and technologies used for evaluating soccer players' health and fitness variables with a specific focus on cardiorespiratory testing. A clear distinction of the functionality and the specificity between the field tests and laboratory tests is well established in the literature. The review findings prioritize field tests over laboratory tests, not only for commodity purpose but also for motivational and specificity reasons. Moreover, the research literature suggests a combination of various tests to provide a comprehensive assessment of the players. Finally, more research needs to be conducted to develop a specific and comprehensive test model through the combination of various exercise modes for soccer players.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 27%
Student > Master 17 14%
Researcher 10 8%
Lecturer 5 4%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 4%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 38 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 48 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 44 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 February 2019.
All research outputs
#5,370,946
of 25,393,455 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine - Open
#342
of 593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,451
of 335,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine - Open
#14
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,393,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 335,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.