ArticlePeerJ2019
Modelling the effect of curves on distance running performance.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. 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.
- Toward a record-eligible sub-2-hour marathon: an updated integrative framework of Physiological, technological, and cognitive determinants.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Review
- Bank-speed alignment: a conceptual framework for understanding indoor track performance.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
- The Effect of Midsole Thickness on Running Economy, Spatiotemporal Values and Perceptions of Comfort and Exertion in Well-trained Runners: A Randomized, Cross-over Trial.Sports medicine - open · 2025Article
- Is a sub 7-h IronmanFrontiers in sports and active living · 2022Article
- Comparison of Muscle Activity During 200 m Indoor Curve and Straight Sprinting in Elite Female Sprinters.Journal of human kinetics · 2021Article
- Efficient trajectory optimization for curved running using a 3D musculoskeletal model with implicit dynamics.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- A Model for World-Class 10,000 m Running Performances: Strategy and Optimization.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough straight ahead running appears to be faster, distance running races are predominately contested on tracks or roads that involve curves. How much faster could world records be run on straight courses?
methodsHere,we propose a model to explain the slower times observed for races involving curves compared to straight running. For a given running velocity, on a curve, the average axial leg force (
resultsThe differences between our model predictions and the actual indoor world records, are between 0.45% in 3,000 m and 1.78% in the 1,500 m for males, and 0.59% in the 5,000 m and 1.76% in the 3,000 m for females. We estimate that a 2:01:39 marathon on a 400 m track, corresponds to 2:01:32 on a straight path and to 2:02:00 on a 200 m track.
conclusionOur model predicts that compared to straight racecourses, the increased time due to curves, is notable for smaller curve radii and for faster velocities. But, for larger radii and slower speeds, the time increase is negligible and the general perception of the magnitude of the effects of curves on road racing performance is not supported by our calculations.
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.