ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
The effect of XC-running race Lidingöloppet on determinants of performance.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Observational
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
Aim: This study aimed to investigate the determinants of running performance in a cross-country running race and examine whether running economy and biomechanics are affected. Moreover, we analyzed whether the magnitude of change in running economy (RE) is related to changes in biomechanics, performance, and fitness measures. Method: Thirteen runners (12 male and 1 female), with an average 10 km personal best time of 36:46 ± 3:17 (min:s), participated in the 30 km cross-country race, Lidingöloppet. Assessments of submaximal and maximal running physiology, biomechanics, and anthropometry were conducted before and immediately after the race. A multiple linear regression model was applied to explain performance variance. Pearson's correlation analyses examined the relationships between performance and pre-test variables, and between changes in running economy and both pre-test fitness measures and changes in biomechanics. Paired Student's t-tests were used to compare pre- and post-race values. Results: Performance was best explained using a model including oxygen uptake at lactate threshold (LT), fat utilization, and allometrically scaled running economy ( Conclusion: The best performance prediction model included oxygen uptake at estimated lactate threshold, fat utilization during submaximal running, and allometrically scaled running economy. Oxygen cost of running increased post-race, likely due to increased fat oxidation, despite decreased body mass. No changes in biomechanics were observed, and changes in running economy could not be explained by changes in biomechanics. Aerobic fitness, anthropometry, and performance were not associated with changes in running economy. Given the small and relatively homogeneous sample, findings should be considered exploratory, although they suggest that practitioners may benefit from targeting fat oxidation, oxygen uptake at the estimated lactate threshold, and running economy in training.
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.