↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Impact of Different Training Modalities on Anthropometric and Metabolic Characteristics in Overweight/Obese Subjects: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
295 X users
facebook
15 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
3 YouTube creators

Readers on

mendeley
345 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Impact of Different Training Modalities on Anthropometric and Metabolic Characteristics in Overweight/Obese Subjects: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0082853
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lukas Schwingshackl, Sofia Dias, Barbara Strasser, Georg Hoffmann

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials was to compare the effects of aerobic training (AET), resistance training (RT), and combined aerobic and resistance training (CT) on anthropometric parameters, blood lipids, and cardiorespiratory fitness in overweight and obese subjects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 295 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 345 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 338 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 60 17%
Student > Bachelor 53 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 14%
Researcher 25 7%
Student > Postgraduate 17 5%
Other 69 20%
Unknown 74 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 95 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 62 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 5%
Social Sciences 15 4%
Other 34 10%
Unknown 91 26%