MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408340745 · doi:10.1080/02640414.2025.2477397

Biomechanical determinants of running economy

2025· article· en· W4408340745 on OpenAlexafffund
Claudiane Arakaki Fukuchi, Darren J. Stefanyshyn, John W. Wannop

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sports Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMitacs
KeywordsRunning economyEconomicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineInternal medicineVO2 max

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Running economy (RE) defined as the submaximal rate of oxygen consumption during running, has been correlated with better performance. Biomechanical factors such as spatiotemporal parameters and lower extremity mechanics play a significant role in influencing RE. However, the relationship between RE and biomechanical variables in middle-distance running shoes is still unclear. In this study, twenty-one healthy male runners (age: 32.5 ± 5.6 years, height: 1.70 ± 0.10 m, body mass: 69.9 ± 7.3 kg) performed running trials on the treadmill. Physiological and biomechanical variables, including joint angles, moments, angular velocities, powers, ground reaction forces, and spatiotemporal parameters were analyzed. Multiple linear regression and backward stepwise regression analyses were employed to identify key biomechanical determinants of RE. The final regression model identified that the hip positive power, knee extension angular velocity, ankle plantarflexion angular velocity and negative power, and metatarsophalangeal extension angular velocity explained 73% of RE variability. Therefore, focus on optimizing these biomechanical variables, possible with specific shoe properties, could lead to enhanced RE in middle-distance running shoes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sports SciencesSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207