Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30412626›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2018

Effects of different recovery strategies following a half-marathon on fatigue markers in recreational runners.

Thimo Wiewelhove, Christoph Schneider, Alexander Döweling, Florian Hanakam, Christian Rasche, Tim Meyer, Michael Kellmann, Mark Pfeiffer, Alexander Ferrauti

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Effect of Daily OralNutrients · 2021
    Trial
  6. Effect ofNutrients · 2019
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Muscle Damage and Immune-Endocrine Responses in 20-km Walking Race.International journal of exercise science · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Thimo WiewelhoveFaculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1020-8780
Christoph SchneiderFaculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Alexander DöwelingFaculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Florian HanakamFaculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Christian RascheInstitute of Sports Science, Johannes-Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0675-3372
Tim MeyerInstitute of Sports and Preventive Medicine, Saarland University, Campus, Saarbrücken, Germany.
Michael KellmannFaculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Mark PfeifferInstitute of Sports Science, Johannes-Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Alexander FerrautiFaculty of Sport Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Ruhr University Bochum · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DESaarland University · DEThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the effects of different recovery strategies on fatigue markers following a prolonged running exercise.

methods46 recreational male runners completed a half-marathon, followed by active recovery (ACT), cold water immersion (CWI), massage (MAS) or passive recovery (PAS). Countermovement jump height, muscle soreness and perceived recovery and stress were measured 24h before the half-marathon (pre), immediately after the recovery intervention (postrec) and 24h after the race (post24). In addition, muscle contractile properties and blood markers of fatigue were determined at pre and post24.

resultsMagnitude-based inferences revealed substantial differences in the changes between the groups. At postrec, ACT was harmful to perceived recovery (ACT vs. PAS: effect size [ES] = -1.81) and serum concentration of creatine kinase (ACT vs. PAS: ES = 0.42), with CWI being harmful to jump performance (CWI vs. PAS: ES = -0.98). It was also beneficial for reducing muscle soreness (CWI vs. PAS: ES = -0.88) and improving perceived stress (CWI vs. PAS: ES = -0.64), with MAS being beneficial for reducing muscle soreness (MAS vs. PAS: ES = -0.52) and improving perceived recovery (MAS vs. PAS: ES = 1.00). At post24, both CWI and MAS were still beneficial for reducing muscle soreness (CWI vs. PAS: ES = 1.49; MAS vs. PAS: ES = 1.12), with ACT being harmful to perceived recovery (ACT vs. PAS: ES = -0.68), serum concentration of creatine kinase (ACT vs. PAS: ES = 0.84) and free-testosterone (ACT vs. PAS: ES = -0.91).

conclusionsIn recreational runners, a half-marathon results in fatigue symptoms lasting at least 24h. To restore subjective fatigue measures, the authors recommend CWI and MAS, as these recovery strategies are more effective than PAS, with ACT being even disadvantageous. However, runners must be aware that neither the use of ACT nor CWI or MAS had any beneficial effect on objective fatigue markers.

Indexed as

Muscle FatigueRunningAdultBiomarkersFemaleHumansMaleBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID30412626
PMCPMC6226207
OpenAlexW2900418812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.