Skip to content

The Association Between Changes in Weekly Running Distance and Running-Related Injury: Preparing for a Half Marathon.

PMID 30526231 (2019): injury, load — Injury risk (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 11:13 PM

Study note • PMID 30526231

The Association Between Changes in Weekly Running Distance and Running-Related Injury: Preparing for a Half Marathon.

The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy2019 • DOI 10.2519/jospt.2019.8541
Evidence C56/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

To investigate the association between change in weekly running distance and RRI, and to examine whether the association may be modified by the running schedule the runner follows. (cohort study; n=56 runners).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Injury risk under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: To investigate the association between change in weekly running distance and RRI, and to examine whether the association may be modified by the running schedule the runner follows.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Injury risk under the tested conditions.
  • Population: n=56 runners.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 14 weeks • 98 days • 21 days.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: injury, load (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 14 weeks • 98 days • 21 days.
  • Outcomes: Injury risk.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it helps, and who should skip it

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (n=56 runners) working on injury risk.
  • Athletes who can measure Injury risk with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should skip

  • 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: cohort study.
  • Population: n=56 runners.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Injury risk.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 14 weeks • 98 days • 21 days.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 30526231 (2019) — The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

Significantly more runners were injured 21 days into the study period when they increased their weekly running distances by 20% to 60% compared with those who increased their distances by less than 20%.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations & bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Coaching beta

Get a plan that adapts to your life.

Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.

Keep going

Sources