ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2026
Advanced Footwear Technology in Distance Running: What We Know, What We Don't Know, and Future Directions.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past decade, running shoes have undergone substantial innovation with the emergence of Advanced Footwear Technology (AFT). Shoes with AFT are typically characterized by highly compliant (deformable) and resilient (high energy return) midsole foams, embedded curved stiffening elements, low mass, and a rockered longitudinal geometry. This expert statement aims to synthesize established knowledge, remaining uncertainties and key directions for future research on AFT in middle- and long-distance running. Current literature demonstrates robust improvements in running economy and performance with AFT, with reported metabolic savings of approximately 2%-4%, and corresponding performance improvements of 1%-3%. These benefits likely arise from a combination of "acute" and possibly "long-term" mechanisms. Proposed acute mechanisms include decreased muscle force production due to higher positive work from energy-returning foams, lower muscle force production to accommodate mechanical running demands due to compliant midsoles, and improved mechanical efficiency associated with greater longitudinal bending stiffness and curved geometry. Importantly, AFT features have a synergistic effect, with the relative importance of each mechanism differing depending on the context. Emerging evidence also suggests potential reductions in muscle damage/inflammation and soreness, which could support better physiological resilience, and higher training volumes/quality. From a biomechanical injury risk perspective, AFT can redistribute loading, potentially increasing metatarsal and tarsal stress while reducing tibia and possibly Achilles tendon loading. However, injury risk associated with AFT use remains equivocal, with limited high-quality data. Notably, substantial inter-individual variability has been observed, influencing both running economy and potential injury risk although the determinants of this variability remain unclear.
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.