Study note • PMID 29105001
Design of ProjectRun21: a 14-week prospective cohort study of the influence of running experience and running pace on running-related injury in half-marathoners.
How to use this page
This note summarizes one study record. Check the participants, methods, results, and limitations before applying it to training.
- • Design signal: expert consensus / guideline.
- • Population relevance: mixed/unclear athlete specificity.
- • Consistency: single-study evidence.
- • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.
ELI5
In plain language
BACKGROUND: Participation in half-marathon has been steeply increasing during the past decade. (expert consensus / guideline; runners).
In this expert consensus / guideline, the abstract reports associations involving Injury risk (not necessarily causation). Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.
Takeaways
What the abstract suggests
- • Study question: BACKGROUND: Participation in half-marathon has been steeply increasing during the past decade.
- • In this expert consensus / guideline, the abstract reports associations involving Injury risk (not necessarily causation).
- • Population: runners.
- • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 7 days.
Protocol
Protocol (as reported)
- • Intervention/exposure: injury, load.
- • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 7 days.
- • Outcomes: Injury risk.
- • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.
Fit
Who it may help, and who should be cautious
Who it helps
- • Athletes similar to the study population (runners) working on injury risk.
- • Athletes who can measure Injury risk with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.
Who should be cautious
- • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
- • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.
Methods
What the study actually did
- • Design: expert consensus / guideline.
- • Population: runners.
- • Outcomes measured: Injury risk.
- • Protocol cues mentioned: 7 days.
- • Source: PubMed PMID 29105001 (2017) — Injury epidemiology.
Results excerpt
What the abstract reports
“DISCUSSION: ProjectRun21 will examine if particular subgroups of runners with certain running experiences and running paces seem to sustain more running-related injuries compared with other subgroups of runners.”
Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.
Limits
Limitations and bias
- • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
- • Reviews and consensus statements mix protocols and populations; recommendations may not match your exact constraints.
- • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
- • This is performance information, not medical advice.
Adaptive AI coach for iPhone
Meet your adaptive AI coach.
Tell your coach what you are training for. It builds the plan, follows the work you complete, and adapts upcoming training when recovery, your schedule, or real life changes.
Keep going
Performance Science Lab
Research summaries for endurance athletes, with study context, practical protocols, and clear limitations.
Injury risk performance research
Injury risk is mostly about load errors — spikes, monotony, and ignoring pain signals.
Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol
Evidence-informed protocol: Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol. Practical steps, who it helps, and what to watch out for.