ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Recommendations on the Appropriate Level of Medical Support at Ultramarathons.
Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pre-race medical screening and harm reduction approaches in ultra-endurance racing: A descriptive pilot study of global practice.JSAMS plus · 2025Article
- Real-Time Monitoring of Biometric Responses During a 200-km Ultra-Endurance Race Across the Desert.European journal of sport science · 2025Observational
- Article
- What Is an Extreme Sports Healthcare Provider: An Auto-Ethnographic Study of the Development of an Extreme Sports Medicine Training Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Incidence of exercise-associated hyponatremia during a high-altitude 161-km ultramarathon.Physical activity and nutrition · 2021Article
- Preventing Casualties in Ultramarathons.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- An Analysis of Participation and Performance of 2067 100-km Ultra-Marathons Worldwide.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Participation in ultramarathons continues to grow, especially among older individuals and among younger runners who may have less running and wilderness experience than many past participants. While ultramarathons tend to have relatively few serious medical issues, adverse medical incidents do occur. These factors make it increasingly important that appropriate safety precautions and medical support are defined and implemented at these events to enhance the safety of participants, spectators, and volunteers. This document establishes the minimum recommended level of medical support that should be available at ultramarathons based on current knowledge and the experience of the authors. It offers a balance that is intended to avoid excessive stress on the local medical system while also precluding undue burden on events to provide medical support beyond that which is practical. We propose a three-level classification system to define the extent of medical services, personnel, systems, supplies, and equipment in place and recommend the level of medical support based on event size, distance/duration, remoteness, and environmental conditions that may be encountered during the event. This document also outlines the recommended education and training of medical providers and discusses other medical and logistical considerations related to the provision of medical support at ultramarathons. We suggest that ultramarathon organizers review and adopt these recommendations to enhance safety and reduce the risk of adverse events to participants.
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.