ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2026
National-Standard Middle-Distance Runners Maintain 1500 m Time Trial Running Performance on Successive Days.
Article in European journal of sport science, 2026. 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.
- National-Standard Middle-Distance Runners Maintain 1500 m Time Trial Running Performance on Successive Days.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
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
To examine how middle-distance athletes maintain self-paced time trial performance on successive days, 12 national-standard middle-distance specialists performed two self-paced 1500 m time trials on successive days. Following baseline assessment and familiarisation trials, participants (10 male, 2 female, mean age ± SD: 27 ± 7 years, mass: 66 ± 8 kg, height: 1.80 ± 0.08 m, season best 1500 m time: 243.9 ± 18.4 s) performed two 1500 m time trials separated by 24 h on an instrumented treadmill. Internal (respiratory exchange ratio; RER, oxygen uptake, blood lactate concentration, heart rate, session and differential ratings of perceived exertion) and external (speed and time) measures quantified exercise intensity. Step length and frequency were collected from integrated force transducers (1000 Hz). All variables were log transformed before analysis with mixed linear models. The uncertainty (90% confidence interval) of our between-trial differences (trial 2 vs. trial 1) for all measures other than peak and mean RER were equivalent to previously reported measurement errors. Additionally, athletes were ∼2.5 times more likely to perceive greater exertion for time trial two, but with considerable uncertainty around the estimates. National-standard middle-distance specialists maintain 1500 m time trial running performance on successive days without the use of any structured recovery interventions.
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.