ArticleBMC research notes2024
Analysis of the 10-day ultra-marathon using a predictive XG boost model.
Article in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Systematic Review of the Factors Associated with Performance in Non-Elite Runners.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Review
- 24-Hour Ultra-Marathon Running: A Narrative Review of Performance Factors and Physiological Impacts.Sports medicine - open · 2026Review
- Change in elevation predicts 100 km ultra marathon performance.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Race course characteristics are the most important predictors in 48 h ultramarathon running.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Analysis of the 10-day ultra-marathon using a predictive XG boost model.BMC research notes · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveUltra-marathon running races are held as distance-limited or time-limited events, ranging from 6 h to 10 days. Only a few runners compete in 10-day events, and so far, we have little knowledge about the athletes' origins, performance, and event characteristics. The aim of the present study was to investigate the origin and performance of these runners and the fastest race locations. A machine learning model based on the XG Boost algorithm was built to predict running speed from the athlete´s age, gender, country of origin, country where the race takes place, the type of race and the kind of running surface. The model explainability tools were then used to investigate how each independent variable would influence the predicted running speed.
resultsThe model rated the origin of the athlete as the most important predictor, followed by age group, running on dirt path, gender, running on asphalt, and event location. Running on dirt path led to a significant reduction of running speed, while running on asphalt showed faster running speeds compared to other surfaces. Most athletes came from USA, followed by Russia, Germany, Ukraine, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. Most of the runners competed in USA. The fastest 10-day runners were from Finland and Israel. The fastest 10-day races were held in Greece.
conclusionsMost 10-day runners originated from USA, but the fastest runners originate from Finland and Israel. The fastest race courses were in Greece. Running on dirt paths leads to a significant reduction in running speed while running on asphalt leads to faster running speeds.
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.