Skip to content

Study note

Pacing in ultra-marathon running: the Western States 100-mile endurance run 2006-2023.

PMID 40087377 (2025): pacing — Time-trial performance (study note for endurance athletes).

Updated Jul 22, 2026

Read the study note

Study note • PMID 40087377

Pacing in ultra-marathon running: the Western States 100-mile endurance run 2006-2023.

Scientific reports2025 • DOI 10.1038/s41598-025-92141-2

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: controlled study.
  • 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

Pacing has been investigated in different running races, including ultra-marathons. (controlled study; n=3837 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: Pacing has been investigated in different running races, including ultra-marathons.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance under the tested conditions.
  • Population: n=3837 runners.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 160 km.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: pacing (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 160 km.
  • 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 (n=3837 runners) 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: controlled study.
  • Population: n=3837 runners.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 160 km.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 40087377 (2025) — Scientific reports.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

There are no significant differences in age groups in women.

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).
  • 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.

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

Sources