| Title |
Is There an Economical Running Technique? A Review of Modifiable Biomechanical Factors Affecting Running Economy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-016-0474-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabel S. Moore |
| Abstract |
Running economy (RE) has a strong relationship with running performance, and modifiable running biomechanics are a determining factor of RE. The purposes of this review were to (1) examine the intrinsic and extrinsic modifiable biomechanical factors affecting RE; (2) assess training-induced changes in RE and running biomechanics; (3) evaluate whether an economical running technique can be recommended and; (4) discuss potential areas for future research. Based on current evidence, the intrinsic factors that appeared beneficial for RE were using a preferred stride length range, which allows for stride length deviations up to 3 % shorter than preferred stride length; lower vertical oscillation; greater leg stiffness; low lower limb moment of inertia; less leg extension at toe-off; larger stride angles; alignment of the ground reaction force and leg axis during propulsion; maintaining arm swing; low thigh antagonist-agonist muscular coactivation; and low activation of lower limb muscles during propulsion. Extrinsic factors associated with a better RE were a firm, compliant shoe-surface interaction and being barefoot or wearing lightweight shoes. Several other modifiable biomechanical factors presented inconsistent relationships with RE. Running biomechanics during ground contact appeared to play an important role, specifically those during propulsion. Therefore, this phase has the strongest direct links with RE. Recurring methodological problems exist within the literature, such as cross-comparisons, assessing variables in isolation, and acute to short-term interventions. Therefore, recommending a general economical running technique should be approached with caution. Future work should focus on interdisciplinary longitudinal investigations combining RE, kinematics, kinetics, and neuromuscular and anatomical aspects, as well as applying a synergistic approach to understanding the role of kinetics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 319 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 74 | 23% |
| United States | 47 | 15% |
| Spain | 23 | 7% |
| Australia | 14 | 4% |
| Canada | 13 | 4% |
| Brazil | 6 | 2% |
| India | 5 | 2% |
| Ireland | 5 | 2% |
| France | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 34 | 11% |
| Unknown | 93 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 221 | 69% |
| Scientists | 73 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 20 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1101 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 209 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 166 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 119 | 11% |
| Researcher | 95 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 53 | 5% |
| Other | 200 | 18% |
| Unknown | 275 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 443 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 114 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 77 | 7% |
| Engineering | 50 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 2% |
| Other | 83 | 7% |
| Unknown | 326 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 337. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2024.
All research outputs
#99,692
of 25,758,211 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#82
of 2,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,649
of 407,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#3
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,897 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 407,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.