ReviewCureus2025
The Influence of Running Cadence on Biomechanics and Injury Prevention: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Gait Retraining for Patellofemoral Pain in Runners: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Biomechanical Evidence.Sports medicine - open · 2026Pooled it
- The Heel-Strike Fallacy and Cadence Beliefs in Distance Running: A Narrative Review.Sports medicine - open · 2026Review
- Robot-Assisted Gait Training in a Patient with Adult Polyglucosan Body Disease: A Case Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Lower-Limb Biomechanical Adaptations to Exercise-Induced Fatigue During Running: A Systematic Review of Injury-Relevant Mechanical Changes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
Running is a widely practiced physical activity with well-established health benefits. However, it is frequently associated with overuse musculoskeletal injuries. Among the modifiable biomechanical variables, increasing cadence, defined as the number of steps per minute, has emerged as a promising target for reducing injury risk by altering impact forces and load distribution. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate and critically appraise the scientific evidence on the effects of running cadence modification on biomechanics and injury prevention in adult runners. Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (2009-2025). Eighteen studies were included, encompassing randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, cross-sectional analyses, and systematic reviews. Cadence was the main variable examined in relation to biomechanical or clinical outcomes. Data were extracted by three independent reviewers, and a narrative synthesis was performed due to methodological heterogeneity. A moderate increase in cadence (typically 5-10%) led to consistent biomechanical improvements, including reduced vertical ground reaction forces, lower loading rates, shorter stride length, and improved lower limb alignment. These adaptations were associated with reduced stress on the tibia, knee, and hip joints. Importantly, cadence modification did not negatively affect metabolic cost and, in some cases, enhanced running economy. Auditory cueing strategies facilitated adherence, and evidence suggested a preventive effect on injuries such as patellofemoral pain and tibial stress fractures. Cadence retraining appears to be a low-cost, accessible, and effective strategy to optimize running biomechanics and potentially reduce the incidence of overuse injuries. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm its long-term clinical and performance-related benefits.
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.