Motion control vs neutral / cushioned running shoes: Number of runners sustaining a lower‐limb running injurya (
It is very uncertain whether motion control changes number of runners sustaining a lower‐limb running injurya ( compared with neutral / cushioned running shoes (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Motion control vs neutral / cushioned running shoes Number of runners sustaining a lower‐limb running injurya ( · healthy adults participating in recreational running It is very uncertain whether motion control changes number of runners sustaining a lower‐limb running injurya ( compared with neutral / cushioned running shoes (very low certainty). Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.92 [0.3, 2.81] | 2 studies · 421 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.