Aging, Physical Health and Exercise Physiology

A special issue of Behavioral Sciences (ISSN 2076-328X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (10 February 2021) | Viewed by 4228

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Programme Manager BSc Sport and Exercise Science, Department of Sport, Hartpury University, Hartpury GL19 3BE, UK
Interests: youth; muscle function; profiling; adult; physical qualities

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The global population is increasing, as is the amount of middle-aged (~35 to 55 years) and old (>55 years) people. This is attributed to improvements in medical care, a decline in the leading causes of mortality and a better appreciation for factors that enhance longevity (e.g., exercise and physical activity). Alongside the physiological changes, ageing remains associated with functional changes such as dynapenia and sarcopenia. It is well-documented that these changes are not uniform, with strength and power declining faster than muscle mass into older age, and the lower-body regions displaying greater rates of dynapenia and sarcopenia than the upper-body. Though the mechanism underlying this disparity remains equivocal, dynapenia and sarcopenia can have a negative effect on quality of life, daily functioning and athleticism. Such observations are established within the literature, with studies typically utilising older male populations. A key omission, therefore, is work in ‘middle-aged’ and female populations, which leaves an incomplete picture of the ageing process and the associated physiological changes.

This Special Issue will highlight the effect of exercise and physical activity on ageing and the underpinning physiological mechanisms. Moreover, we particularly welcome submissions including middle-aged or female populations and those with an applied/clinical focus.

Dr. John F. T. Fernandes
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Behavioral Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

13 pages, 1423 KiB  
Article
Prediction of One Repetition Maximum Using Reference Minimum Velocity Threshold Values in Young and Middle-Aged Resistance-Trained Males
by John F. T. Fernandes, Amelia F. Dingley, Amador Garcia-Ramos, Alejandro Perez-Castilla, James J. Tufano and Craig Twist
Behav. Sci. 2021, 11(5), 71; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11050071 - 7 May 2021
Cited by 13 | Viewed by 3633
Abstract
Background: This study determined the accuracy of different velocity-based methods when predicting one-repetition maximum (1RM) in young and middle-aged resistance-trained males. Methods: Two days after maximal strength testing, 20 young (age 21.0 ± 1.6 years) and 20 middle-aged (age 42.6 ± 6.7 years) [...] Read more.
Background: This study determined the accuracy of different velocity-based methods when predicting one-repetition maximum (1RM) in young and middle-aged resistance-trained males. Methods: Two days after maximal strength testing, 20 young (age 21.0 ± 1.6 years) and 20 middle-aged (age 42.6 ± 6.7 years) resistance-trained males completed three repetitions of bench press, back squat, and bent-over-row at loads corresponding to 20–80% 1RM. Using reference minimum velocity threshold (MVT) values, the 1RM was estimated from the load-velocity relationships through multiple (20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80% 1RM), two-point (20 and 80% 1RM), high-load (60 and 80% 1RM) and low-load (20 and 40% 1RM) methods for each group. Results: Despite most prediction methods demonstrating acceptable correlations (r = 0.55 to 0.96), the absolute errors for young and middle-aged groups were generally moderate to high for bench press (absolute errors = 8.2 to 14.2% and 8.6 to 20.4%, respectively) and bent-over-row (absolute error = 14.9 to 19.9% and 8.6 to 18.2%, respectively). For squats, the absolute errors were lower in the young group (5.7 to 13.4%) than the middle-aged group (13.2 to 17.0%) but still unacceptable. Conclusion: These findings suggest that reference MVTs cannot accurately predict the 1RM in these populations. Therefore, practitioners need to directly assess 1RM. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aging, Physical Health and Exercise Physiology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop