Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24977468›Full record

ArticleJournal of sports sciences2014

The influence of a new sole geometry while running.

Claudia Knoepfli-Lenzin, Jennifer Carole Waech, Turgut Gülay, Florian Schellenberg, Silvio Lorenzetti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of sports sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Claudia Knoepfli-Lenzina Exercise Physiology , Institute for Human Movement Science and Sport, ETH Zurich , Zurich , Switzerland.
Jennifer Carole Waech
Turgut Gülay
Florian Schellenberg
Silvio Lorenzetti

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Running shoe construction influences the forces experienced by the human body while running. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether the new sole architecture of the On running shoe reduces ground reaction forces compared with running barefoot or with a conventional running shoe and whether it changes the physiological parameters of running in shoes. Thirty-seven trained male participants were studied while running at submaximal speeds wearing their conventional running shoe, wearing the On running shoe and while barefoot. Additional biomechanical and physiological values were investigated to determine whether the On running shoe induced any changes in these parameters compared with conventional running shoes. The On exhibited similar ground reaction forces as conventional shoes, and these were different from the forces experienced while running barefoot, showing that the On was more similar to typical shoed running. No difference was observed in running economy between the On and a conventional shoe model. However, a slightly lower heart rate (HR) (≈1.3%) and blood lactate concentration (≈5.5%) were observed during submaximal running with the On running shoe compared with a conventional running shoe, as well as a greater lateral deviation of the centre of pressure mid-stance. The ramifications of the reduced HR and blood lactate concentration for competitive performance are unknown.

Indexed as

Equipment DesignFootShoesSports EquipmentStress, MechanicalAdultAristolochic AcidsBiomechanical PhenomenaHeart RateHumansLactic AcidMalePressureRunningAristolochic AcidsLactic Acidpressalanine Aground reaction forceheart raterunning economyrunning performancerunning shoe design

Identifiers

PMID24977468
PMCPMC4160293

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.