Submited on: 10 Mar 2013 03:01:58 AM GMT
Published on: 11 Mar 2013 01:10:57 PM GMT
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    That the more conventional running shoe is more efficient for running.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    This is a case report of a relatively new style of running shoe that for intents and purposes appears to be a sandle.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    The author only cites one paper, whereas much has been written on the effect of sow type on running efficiency. 


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Since this is a case report, the conclusions are limited.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    The protocol for the tests is provided and it not appear to be randomized for the different trials.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    The time trials for the different speeds were not the same.  The highest speed only lasted one minute and it may be that the heart rate had not yet plateaued which would have been a better inidcator of effort.  Also that the heart rate was measured after the end of exercise; anyvariationin that protocol would have directly influenced the rsesults.


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    NA


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    No

     


  • Other Comments:

    This paper is a case report on one fit 73 year old individual.  With due respect the muscle mass and mechanics of the aged are different from the younger population and the results may not be applicable.  Also that the barefoot shoe structure does not provide any lateral support makes these shoes of very limited use for running, especially in the elderly.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Many years research experience in exercise physiology

  • How to cite:  Edwards J G.Efficiency of the Barefoot Shoe Compared to the Montrail shoes[Review of the article 'How Running Barefoot (Xero Shoes) and Running Shod (Montrail Shoes) Effects Percent of Maximum Heart rate - A Case Report ' by Misner B].WebmedCentral 2013;4(4):WMCRW002665
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Thank you for your review of this single-subject case report. If you were doing a single subject case report...what age, what gender, what level of fitness, what speeds, and what shoes/shod would you pick to compare heart rate effects percent maximum post exercise? Please explain what methodology model you, sir, would advise. Bill Misner PhD {Emeritus}
Responded by Dr. Bill Misner on 03 Apr 2013 11:28:29 PM
Interesting Case Study
Posted by Prof. Gowrishankar Ramadurai on 21 Mar 2013 11:09:56 AM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The author has thrown open a fndamental question on which type of shoes is going to be helpful in improving running performance. It is indeed a study that need to be given some attention.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes, the author has experimented and analysed. Though it is a single case study, yet, it is something to be looked at.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes. Very much.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    The author, through his experiment, has brought out a contradiction to previously exisitng results. This means that there is scope for further studies that anyone can take up.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    May be few more people can be subjected to similar analysis. Then surely better understanding will emerge.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Somewhat yes.


  • Other Comments:

    The author can try and make few more case studies to further his claim and throw more light on this area of research.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    NA

  • How to cite:  Ramadurai G .Interesting Case Study[Review of the article 'How Running Barefoot (Xero Shoes) and Running Shod (Montrail Shoes) Effects Percent of Maximum Heart rate - A Case Report ' by Misner B].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002629
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Dear Professor Gowrishankar Ramadurai, I discovered your review to be very helpful in expanding this Case Report to larger numbers of runners all ages and both male and female. Thank you for your expertise and directions, Bill Misner PhD {Emeritus}
Responded by Dr. Bill Misner on 23 Mar 2013 04:39:37 PM
Running Economy vs Running Efficiency
Posted by Anonymous Reviewer on 14 Mar 2013 11:54:01 AM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Barefoot vs Shod Models, this paper shows the influence of the shoes in running performance. But the most important thing is that barefoot running can make a worst performance in running on average runners.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    It is shown that barefoot shoes don´t make running efficiency, this may come on runner adaptation and biomechanical pattern. Also is remarkable that average runners shoul run on shod shoes.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes, because not all runners can benefit on run barefoot, a good running tecnique is required and adaptation. Without this adaptation the shoe won´t perform on its own.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    In this personal case the results are supported, but should be convenient a greater study.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Experience of subjects, running biomechanical studies.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    It´s a good start point for more studies on average runners.


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Maybe another tipe of barefoot shoes like 5 fingers...


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes, it can show how often tendencies are above than common sense


  • Other Comments:

    N/A

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Runners and triathletes trainer

  • How to cite:  Anonymous.Running Economy vs Running Efficiency[Review of the article 'How Running Barefoot (Xero Shoes) and Running Shod (Montrail Shoes) Effects Percent of Maximum Heart rate - A Case Report ' by Misner B].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002607
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Professor Antonio Ventín, Thank you for completing a review of this Case Report. Please note I found your comments completely competent. Your interest in this finding expanded the views of several others. Much appreciated, Bill Misner PhD {Emeritus}
Responded by Dr. Bill Misner on 23 Mar 2013 04:36:49 PM