Key result
Female cyclists match men in pacing and risk-taking but show slightly greater day-to-day variability.
Why the study?
Sex differences in pacing profile and day-to-day variability during endurance exercise have been underexplored.
Do men and women differ in pacing profile, risk-taking behavior, and pacing reliability during a 4-km cycling time trial?
Cross-Sectional (n=32)
Do men and women differ in pacing profile, risk-taking behavior, and pacing reliability during a 4-km cycling time trial?
p-value: p=> 0.05
Men and women exhibit similar pacing profiles and risk-taking behavior during a 4-km cycling time trial, though women demonstrate slightly greater day-to-day pacing profile variability.
Similar day-to-day power output variability between sexes in 4-km cycling trials; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective confirmation before informing training.
BACKGROUND: Sex differences in pacing profile and day-to-day variability have been underexplored. Therefore, this study investigated potential sex differences in pacing profile, risk-taking behavior, and pacing reliability during a 4-km cycling time trial. HYPOTHESIS: Men and women present similar pacing and assume similar risk of premature trial interruption during a 4-km cycling time trial. In addition, it was hypothesized that men and women might present comparable performance and pacing reliability. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. METHODS: A total of 32 cyclists (16 men and 16 women) performed 2 4-km cycling time trials on separate days. Power output and ratings of perceived exertion were recorded during the trials. To quantify the risk of premature time-trial interruption, the hazard score was calculated as the product of the rating of perceived exertion and the remaining distance. RESULTS: > 0.05). However, the day-to-day coefficient of variation for power output distribution ranged from 3.5% to 7.2% in women and from 1.9% to 6.3% in men, indicating slightly greater day-to-day variability in the pacing profile for women. CONCLUSION: Men and women exhibit similar pacing profiles, risk-taking behavior, and endurance performance reliability during a 4-km cycling time trial. However, women seem to demonstrate greater day-to-day pacing profile variability than men. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The present findings provide insights that enable more accurate monitoring and prescription of training protocols in female cyclists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marinho et al. (2026) reported a cross-sectional. Female sex vs. Male sex was evaluated on Day-to-day coefficient of variation for power output distribution (p=> 0.05). Female cyclists exhibited similar pacing profiles and risk-taking behavior as men during a 4-km time trial, but demonstrated slightly greater day-to-day pacing profile variability.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: