ArticleScientific reports2024
Technologically advanced running shoes reduce oxygen cost and cumulative tibial loading per kilometer in recreational female and male runners.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Footwear Technology in Distance Running: What We Know, What We Don't Know, and Future Directions.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
- Economy benefits of running in advanced footwear technology shoes remain with plantarflexion fatigue.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Data driven shoe design improves running economy beyond state-of-the-art Advanced Footwear Technology running shoes.Journal of sport and health science · 2026Article
- Sex and Isolated Anthropometric Measures Do Not Explain Individual Differences in Responsiveness to Advanced Footwear Technology in Highly Trained Runners.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2026Article
- The Mediating Effect of Running Biomechanics, Anthropometrics, Muscle Architecture, and Comfort on Running Economy Across Different Shoes.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2025Article
- Metabolic effects of carbon-plated running shoes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Technologically advanced running shoes (TARS) improve performance compared to classical running shoes (CRS). Improved race performance has been attributed to metabolic savings in male runners, but it remains unclear if these same benefits are experienced among females and in recreational runners. The mechanisms behind these benefits are still not fully understood despite the need for optimisation, and their influence on injury mechanisms has not been explored. Here we combined biomechanical, physiological, and modelling approaches to analyse joint mechanics, oxygen uptake, and tibial load in nineteen male and female recreational runners running with CRS and TARS at their individual lactate threshold speed (12.4 ± 1.9 km/h). Oxygen uptake was 3.0 ± 1.5% lower in TARS than in CRS. Ankle dorsiflexion, joint moment and joint power were reduced in TARS compared to CRS at various phases of stance including midstance, while knee joint mechanics were mostly similar throughout. There were no significant differences for tibial bending moment during the stance phase but cumulative tibial damage per kilometre was 12 ± 9% lower in TARS compared to CRS. Our results suggest that running with TARS reduces oxygen cost in recreational female and male runners, which may partly be explained by differences in lower limb joint mechanics. The lower cumulative tibial bone load with TARS may allow runners to run longer distances in this type of shoe compared to CRS.
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.