ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The pacing differences in performance levels of marathon and half-marathon runners.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pacing Profiles in Half-Marathon and Marathon Running Based on Performance Level, Sex, and Age: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- 24-Hour Ultra-Marathon Running: A Narrative Review of Performance Factors and Physiological Impacts.Sports medicine - open · 2026Review
- Physiological associations with heart rate-speed decoupling during a half-marathon in adolescent endurance runners.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Case report: Elevation variability and pacing regulation in an elite half-marathon runner: a longitudinal case study.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Influence of Sex, Athletic Category and Athletic Level on Marathon Pacing Strategy: An Analysis of the Trinidad Alfonso EDP Valencia Marathon From 2014 to 2023.European journal of sport science · 2025Article
- The physiology and psychology of negative splits: insights into optimal marathon pacing strategies.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Performance prediction equation for the Valencia Marathon based on time and pacing in the half marathon.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- A case series of eight amateur athletes: exercise-induced pre-/syncope during the Zurich Marathon 2023.European heart journal. Case reports · 2024Article
- Prediction of half-marathon performance of male recreational marathon runners using nomogram.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Mental preparation in runners: gender differences, competition levels, and psychological training effects on performance.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Many studies indicate a considerable impact of optimal pacing on long-distance running performance. Given that the amount of carbohydrates in metabolic processes increases supralinearly with the running intensity, we may observe differences between the pacing strategies of two long-distance races and different performance levels of runners. Accordingly, the present study aimed to examine the differences in pacing strategies between marathon and half-marathon races regarding the performance levels of runners. Methods: The official results and split times from a total of 208,760 (marathon, Results: Positive pacing strategies (i.e., decrease of speed) were observed in all performance groups of both sex and race. Across CS 1-5, significant main effects ( Discussion: Better runners showed more even pacing than slower runners. The half-marathoners showed more even pacing than the marathoners across all performance groups but with a trivial practical significance in women.
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.