ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2007
Training to enhance the physiological determinants of long-distance running performance: can valid recommendations be given to runners and coaches based on current scientific knowledge?
Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 97 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
97 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Acute Effects of Short-Bout High-Intensity Interval Training on Physiological and Perceptual Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Pooled it
- Psychological skills and mindfulness for distance runners: a systematic review of performance, psychological outcomes, and implications for coaching practice.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- The global scientific evolution of cardiopulmonary performance and threshold research in sports sciences during 2010-2025: a comparative bibliometric analysis based on web of science and scopus.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Pooled it
- Meta-analyses of the effects of high-intensity interval training in elite athletes-part I: mean effects on various performance measures.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Pooled it
- Genetics of long-distance runners and road cyclists-A systematic review with meta-analysis.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2022Pooled it
- The Effects of Interval and Continuous Training on the Oxygen Cost of Running in Recreational Runners: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Pooled it
- Meta-Analyses of the Effects of Habitual Running on Indices of Health in Physically Inactive Adults.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2015Pooled it
- The influence of foot muscles exercises and minimalist shoes on lactate threshold velocity in long-distance amateur runners: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Intra-individual physiological response of recreational runners to different training mesocycles: a randomized cross-over study.European journal of applied physiology · 2020Trial
- Effects of chronic beetroot juice supplementation on maximum oxygen uptake, velocity associated with maximum oxygen uptake, and peak velocity in recreational runners: a double-blinded, randomized and crossover study.European journal of applied physiology · 2019Trial
- Continuous exercise induces airway epithelium damage while a matched-intensity and volume intermittent exercise does not.Respiratory research · 2019Trial
- Six weeks of aerobic training improves VO2max and MLSS but does not improve the time to fatigue at the MLSS.European journal of applied physiology · 2013Trial
- Dynamic effects of different exercise modalities on autonomic recovery: a longitudinal study based on heart rate variability.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Comparing four training modalities on body composition, cardiorespiratory fitness and cardiovascular responses in sedentary young men: a randomized trial.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Contribution of Aerobic Physiological Variables to 500 m Sprint Kayak Performance in National-Level Athletes: A Hierarchical Regression Analysis.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- VO2max ageing and all cause mortality in a global cohort of multi marathoners.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Relative, individualized, or normalized? A conceptual clarification of running speed terminology in soccer.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Study on the effects of 4 × 4 min high-intensity interval training frequency on cardiorespiratory function, metabolic indices, and exercise performance in male university students.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Effects of Acute Altitude, Speed and Surface on Biomechanical Loading in Distance Running.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article investigates whether there is currently sufficient scientific knowledge for scientists to be able to give valid training recommendations to long-distance runners and their coaches on how to most effectively enhance the maximal oxygen uptake, lactate threshold and running economy. Relatively few training studies involving trained distance runners have been conducted, and these studies have often included methodological factors that make interpretation of the findings difficult. For example, the basis of most of the studies was to include one or more specific bouts of training in addition to the runners' 'normal training', which was typically not described or only briefly described. The training status of the runners (e.g. off-season) during the study period was also typically not described. This inability to compare the runners' training before and during the training intervention period is probably the main factor that hinders the interpretation of previous training studies. Arguably, the second greatest limitation is that only a few of the studies included more than one experimental group. Consequently, there is no comparison to allow the evaluation of the relative efficacy of the particular training intervention. Other factors include not controlling the runners' training load during the study period, and employing small sample sizes that result in low statistical power. Much of the current knowledge relating to chronic adaptive responses to physical training has come from studies using sedentary individuals; however, directly applying this knowledge to formulate training recommendations for runners is unlikely to be valid. Therefore, it would be difficult to argue against the view that there is insufficient direct scientific evidence to formulate training recommendations based on the limited research. Although direct scientific evidence is limited, we believe that scientists can still formulate worthwhile training recommendations by integrating the information derived from training studies with other scientific knowledge. This knowledge includes the acute physiological responses in the various exercise domains, the structures and processes that limit the physiological determinants of long-distance running performance, and the adaptations associated with their enhancement. In the future, molecular biology may make an increasing contribution in identifying effective training methods, by identifying the genes that contribute to the variation in maximal oxygen uptake, the lactate threshold and running economy, as well as the biochemical and mechanical signals that induce these genes. Scientists should be cautious when giving training recommendations to runners and coaches based on the limited available scientific knowledge. This limited knowledge highlights that characterising the most effective training methods for long-distance runners is still a fruitful area for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17887811What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.