ArticlePloS one2023
Data-driven evaluation of the Boston marathon qualifying times.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Boston Marathon is one of the most prestigious running races in the world. From its inception in 1897, popularity grew to a point in 1970 where qualifying times were implemented to cap the number of participants. Currently, women's qualifying times in each age group are thirty minutes slower than the men's qualifying times equating to a 16.7% adjustment for the 18-34 age group, decreasing with age to a 10.4% adjustment for the 80+ age group. This setup somewhat counter-intuitively implies that women become faster with age relative to men. We present a data-driven approach to determine qualifying standards that lead to an equal proportion of qualifiers in each age category and gender. We had to exclude the 75-79 and 80+ age groups from analysis due to limited data. When minimizing the difference in proportion of men and women qualifying, the women's times for the 65-69 and 70-74 age groups are 4-5 minutes slower than the current qualifying standard, while they are 0 to 3 minutes faster for all other age groups.
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.