Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42170146›Full record

ReviewCureus2026

Updates to the Running Shoe and Injury Considerations.

Thomas M Neubauer, Robert D Hill, Yao-Wen E Hu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Thomas M NeubauerFamily Medicine, Evans Army Community Hospital, Fort Carson, USA.
Robert D HillFamily Medicine, Joint Base San Antonio, Lackland, USA.
Yao-Wen E HuFamily Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Elite athletes continue to break new records while running shoe design evolves, diverges, and incorporates new technologies. Shoe design is grossly split between minimalist, traditional, and maximalist shoes. Each shoe has a unique design with characteristics defined by the stack height, heel height, heel-to-toe drop, arch support, cushion, weight, and resulting biomechanics. Current epidemiology of running-related injuries correlates to experience level, weekly volume, and training progression, but the literature currently suggests there are limited effects from footwear. Although biomechanical research demonstrates the effects of footwear on the mechanical forces and stressors, clinically relevant outcomes are limited. Despite a lack of conclusive evidence, runners and clinicians often still perceive footwear as a key factor for injury prevention. This narrative review highlights the need for continued research into clinical outcomes and unbiased individualized footwear recommendations based on comfort, experience, and performance goals using current best-known practices.

Indexed as

clinical outcomesfootwear biomechanicsinjury preventionrunning injuriesrunning shoe

Identifiers

PMID42170146
PMCPMC13189237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.