Study note • PMID 30450246
Pacing and predictors of performance during cross-country skiing races: A systematic review.
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: systematic review / meta-analysis.
- • Population relevance: athlete/trained context.
- • Consistency: synthesis evidence present.
- • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.
ELI5
In plain language
BACKGROUND: Cross-country skiing (XCS) racing, a popular international winter sport, is complex and challenging from physical, technical, and tactical perspectives. (systematic review / meta-analysis; elite athletes).
In this systematic review / meta-analysis, the abstract reports associations involving Time-trial performance (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: Cross-country skiing (XCS) racing, a popular international winter sport, is complex and challenging from physical, technical, and tactical perspectives.
- • In this systematic review / meta-analysis, the abstract reports associations involving Time-trial performance (not necessarily causation).
- • Population: elite athletes.
- • Protocol cues: abstract may omit dose/timing; use the full paper to replicate accurately.
Protocol
Protocol (as reported)
- • Intervention/exposure: pacing, even pacing.
- • Dose/time/duration: abstract doesn’t include enough detail; use the full paper’s methods section.
- • Outcomes: Time-trial performance.
- • 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 (elite athletes) working on pacing.
- • Athletes who can measure Time-trial performance 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: systematic review / meta-analysis.
- • Population: elite athletes.
- • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
- • Source: PubMed PMID 30450246 (2018) — Journal of sport and health science.
Results excerpt
What the abstract reports
“Furthermore, we would advise less experienced skiers and/or those with lower levels of performance to apply a more even pacing strategy rather than a positive one (i.e., starting the race too fast).”
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.
Pacing performance research
Pacing is applied physiology: the best plan fails if you spend your budget early.
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.