HealthProtocols
← All sources

Is running associated with a lower risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and is the more the better? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Meta-analysis of 14 studies (232,149 participants; 25,951 deaths) associates any running participation with lower all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality versus no running; meta-regression did not find significant dose–response gradients across weekly frequency, duration, pace, or total volume.

Design

  • 14 cohort studies, 232,149 participants, 25,951 deaths
  • Exposure: self-reported running yes/no and weekly dose bins

Headline associations (pooled models)

  • Any running vs none: pooled adjusted HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.68–0.79) for all-cause mortality; CVD HR 0.70 (0.49–0.98); cancer HR 0.77 (0.68–0.87)
  • Dose narrative: mortality was lower even at once weekly and <50 min/week in descriptive bins, yet meta-regression reported no significant linear dose–response for frequency, duration, pace, or total volume—avoid overstating “more is always better.”

Evidence hygiene

Observational running—healthy runner bias and fitness confounding; do not equate with HIIT lab RCTs on VO₂max.

Publication

Pedisic Z, Shrestha N, Kovalchik S, et al. Br J Sports Med. 2020 Aug;54(15):898-905. PMID 31685526.

Outcomes

  • All-Cause Mortality Risk
    Events: /
  • Meta-regression reported no significant dose–response trends for weekly frequency, duration, pace, or total running volume despite lower mortality with any participation—interpret “more is better” marketing cautiously.
View original paper →