## 1 Introduction  
Running as a form of exercise has increased in popularity in the United States over the past 50 years [1]. In addition to its ease of access and low cost of participation, running has been shown to have positive effects on mental health [2], and participation has been shown to reduce cardiovascular, cancer, and all-cause mortality [3, 4]. Unfortunately, runners also experience a high rate of injury, approaching 79% within a six-month period [5], with separate work suggesting novice runners are at a higher risk of injury compared to experienced runners [6, 7]. The most common running-related injuries (RRIs) include medial tibial stress syndrome, patellar tendonopathy, plantar fascitis, patellofemoral pain syndrome, and liliotibial band syndrome [8, 9]. While many studies have attempted to identify risk factors for general and specific RRIs, evidence is often inconsistent or limited [10, 11]. Previous injury appears to be the most consistent risk factor for future RRI [12, 13, 11]. Three previous reviews report the knee as the main site in the lower limbs affected by RRIs (incidence rate ranging from 7.2 to 50%) [6; 9; 12]. One of the primary knee injuries observed in runners is li litoibial band syndrome (ITBS) [9]. The litoibial band (ITB) is composed of fibrous tissue that runs from the iliac crest to the lateral proximal tibia. The ITB is believed to play a role in providing lateral support and storing elastic energy during forward motion [14]. ITBS is often thought to be the result of friction of the liiotibial band against the lateral femoral epicondyle [15], although this theory for symptom onset is disputed [16]. It is suggested that this condition has a particularly high occurrence rate in runners, as the friction acting on the liiotibial band is most prominent at a knee flexion angle of approximately 30\({}^{\circ}\), which is similar to the average knee flexion angle of runners at foot strike (21.4\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 4.3\({}^{\circ}\)) [17]. A prior report identified a 10.5% prevalence of ITBS in runners, which suggests the value of identifying potential risk factors for this injury [8]. While some training factors, such as higher weekly mileage, have been shown to be associated with ITBS [18; 19], systematic reviews have concluded that there was limited or inconsistent evidence for specific biomechanical variables associated with this form of injury [20; 21]. One recent systematic review concluded limited evidence supports an association of ITBS with higher peak femur external rotation, ITB strain, and ITB strain rate [20]. Conflicting evidence exists to determine the relationship between ITBS and peak hip adduction angle, knee flexion angle at touchdown, peak knee adduction angle, and peak internal rotation angle [20]. The association between ground reaction force data (GRF) and RRIs has been characterized in recent systematic reviews. Limited evidence supports higher loading rates in male novice runners as a risk factor associated with ITBS, whereas moderate evidence of no significant differences in load rates was identified for female recreational runners [10]. Additionally, strong evidence suggests that vertical impact peak is not related to any RRIs, while inconsistent evidence was found for peak braking force [10]. In relation to specific injuries, moderate evidence was found for higher loading rates in runners with plantar fascitis, and lower braking impulse in runners with patellformoral pain [20]. Since the friction of the ITB against the lateral femoral epicondyle may primarily occur at the beginning of the stance phase [17], it has been suggested that load rates (rate of increase in the GRF in the early time of foot-ground contact) contribute to this injury. The relationship between GRF data and ITBS has been previously studied; one investigation found no differences for vertical, posterior, and mediolateral loading rates [22].