Skip to content

Effect of cross-slope angle on running economy and gait characteristics at moderate running velocity.

PMID 37993733 (2024): foot strike — Running economy (study note for endurance athletes).

Last updated/Feb 23, 2026, 10:34 PM

Study note • PMID 37993733

Effect of cross-slope angle on running economy and gait characteristics at moderate running velocity.

European journal of applied physiology2024 • DOI 10.1007/s00421-023-05358-2
Evidence C65/100
Action 2: Consider

Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.

ELI5

In plain language

Outdoor running surfaces are designed with a cross-slope, which can alter kinetic and kinematic gait parameters. (randomized trial; n=6 recreational runners).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Running economy 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: Outdoor running surfaces are designed with a cross-slope, which can alter kinetic and kinematic gait parameters.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Running economy under the tested conditions.
  • Population: n=6 recreational runners.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 10 km.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: foot strike (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 10 km.
  • Outcomes: Running economy.
  • 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=6 recreational runners) working on biomechanics.
  • Athletes who can measure Running economy 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: randomized trial.
  • Population: n=6 recreational runners.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Running economy.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 10 km.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 37993733 (2024) — European journal of applied physiology.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

There were no significant differences in VO(2), HR, RER, or V(E) across cross-slope conditions.

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