Skip to content

Marathon Performance and Pacing in the Doha 2019 Women's IAAF World Championships: Extreme Heat, Suboptimal Pacing, and High Failure Rates.

PMID 35580843 (2022): pacing — Time-trial performance (study note for endurance athletes).

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

Study note • PMID 35580843

Marathon Performance and Pacing in the Doha 2019 Women's IAAF World Championships: Extreme Heat, Suboptimal Pacing, and High Failure Rates.

International journal of sports physiology and performance2022 • DOI 10.1123/ijspp.2022-0020
Evidence C60/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

The Doha 2019 women's World Championship marathon took place in extreme hot (32 degrees C), humid conditions (74% relative humidity) culminating in unprecedented (41%) failure rates. (controlled study; n=40 runners).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance 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: The Doha 2019 women's World Championship marathon took place in extreme hot (32 degrees C), humid conditions (74% relative humidity) culminating in unprecedented (41%) failure rates.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance under the tested conditions.
  • Population: n=40 runners.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 10 km • 15 km • 20 km.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: pacing (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 10 km • 15 km • 20 km.
  • Outcomes: Time-trial performance.
  • 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=40 runners) working on pacing.
  • Athletes who can measure Time-trial performance 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: controlled study.
  • Population: n=40 runners.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 10 km • 15 km • 20 km.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 35580843 (2022) — International journal of sports physiology and performance.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

Top 10 athletes adopted a conservative initial pace, whereas lower-placing athletes adopted a faster, aggressive start.

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