ArticlePloS one2013
Environment and scheduling effects on sprint and middle distance running performances.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 affected elite track-and-field athletes' Olympic preparation before Tokyo 2020 compared to Rio 2016.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Fur removal promotes an earlier expression of involution-related genes in mammary gland of lactating mice.Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology · 2023Article
- Olympic cycle periodicity in women's long and triple jumping performance between 1996 and 2019.PloS one · 2023Article
- Scaling Invariance of Sports Sex Gap.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
- Ultra-endurance athletic performance suggests that energetics drive human morphological thermal adaptation.Evolutionary human sciences · 2019Article
- Are We Reaching the Limits ofFrontiers in physiology · 2017Review
- Has Athletic Performance Reached its Peak?Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAchievement of athletes' performances is related to several factors including physiological, environmental and institutional cycles where physical characteristics are involved. The objective of this study is to analyse the performance achieved in professional sprint and middle-distance running events (100 m to 1500 m) depending on the organization of the annual calendar of track events and their environmental conditions.
methodsFrom 2002 to 2008, all performances of the Top 50 international athletes in the 100 m to 1500 m races (men and women) are collected. The historical series of world records and the 10 best annual performances in these events, amounted to a total of 26,544 performances, are also included in the study.
resultsTwo periods with a higher frequency of peak performances are observed. The first peak occurs around the 27.15(th) ±0.21 week (first week of July) and the second peak around 34.75(th) ±0.14 week (fourth week of August). The second peak tends to be the time of major international competitions (Olympic Games, World Championships, and European Championships) and could be characterized as an institutional moment. The first one, however, corresponds to an environmental optimum as measured by the narrowing of the temperature range at the highest performance around 23.25±3.26°C.
conclusionsThis is the first study to demonstrate that there are two performance peaks at a specific time of year (27th and 34th weeks) in sprint and middle distance. Both institutional and ecophysiological aspects contribute to performance in the 100 m to 1500 m best performances and define the contours of human possibilities. Sport institutions may take this into account in order to provide ideal conditions to improve the next records.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.