Trial reportLipids in health and disease2009
Thermogenic effect of meltdown RTD energy drink in young healthy women: a double blind, cross-over design study.
Trial report in Lipids in health and disease, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Safety and Efficacy ofNutrients · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of a ready-to-drink thermogenic beverage on resting energy expenditure, hemodynamic function, and subjective outcomes.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2023Trial
- The acute effects of a multi-ingredient pre-workout supplement on resting energy expenditure and exercise performance in recreationally active females.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2018Trial
- Acute effectiveness of a "fat-loss" product on substrate utilization, perception of hunger, mood state and rate of perceived exertion at rest and during exercise.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2015Trial
- The effects of supplementation with P-Synephrine alone and in combination with caffeine on resistance exercise performance.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2015Trial
- Common Questions and Misconceptions About Energy Drinks: What Does the Scientific Evidence Really Show?Nutrients · 2024Review
- International society of sports nutrition position stand: energy drinks and energy shots.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2023Review
- The Effects of a Pre-workout Supplement on Measures of Alertness, Mood, and Lower-Extremity Power.Cureus · 2022Article
- Effects of Caffeine and Caffeinated Beverages in Children, Adolescents and Young Adults: Short Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- The Effects of an Energy Drink on Psychomotor Vigilance in Trained Individuals.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2019Article
- Supplementation with a Multi-ingredient Pre-workout Supplement does not Augment Resistance Training Adaptations in Females.International journal of exercise science · 2019Article
- Energy Drinks and Their Impact on the Cardiovascular System: Potential Mechanisms.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2016Review
- International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: energy drinks.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2013Article
- Energy drinks mixed with alcohol: misconceptions, myths, and facts.International journal of general medicine · 2012Article
- Energy beverages: content and safety.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to examine the acute metabolic effects of a high-energy drink in healthy, physically-active women.
methodsTen women (20.4 +/- 0.70 y; 166.9 +/- 7.2 cm; 67.0 +/- 7.0 kg; 29.6 +/- 6.5% body fat) underwent two testing sessions administered in a randomized and double-blind fashion. Subjects reported to the laboratory in a 3-hr post-absorptive state and were provided either 140 ml of the high-energy drink (SUP; commercially marketed as Meltdown RTD) or placebo (P). Subjects consumed two 70 ml doses of SUP or P, separated by 30 min and rested in a semi-recumbent position for 3 hours. Resting oxygen consumption (VO2) and heart rate (HR) were determined every 5 min during the first 30 min and every 10 min during the next 150 min. Blood pressure (BP) was determined every 15 min during the first 30 min and every 30 min thereafter. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis was computed for VO2, whereas a 3-hour average and hourly averages were calculated for respiratory quotient (RQ), total kcal, HR, BP, and profile of mood states (POMS).
resultsAUC analysis revealed a 10.8% difference (p = 0.03) in VO2 between SUP and P. No difference in VO2 was seen between the groups in the first hour, but VO2 in SUP was significantly greater than P in the second (13.9%, p = 0.01) and third hours (11.9%, p = 0.03). A difference (p = 0.03) in energy expenditure was seen between SUP (1.09 +/- 0.10 kcal x min-1) and P (0.99 +/- 0.09 kcal x min-1) for the 3-hour period. Although no difference in energy expenditure was seen in the first hour, significant differences between SUP and P were observed in the second (1.10 +/- 0.11 kcal x min-1 and 0.99 +/- 0.09 kcal x min-1, respectively; p = 0.02) and third hour (1.08 +/- 0.11 kcal x min-1 and 0.99 +/- 0.09 kcal x min-1, respectively; p = 0.05). Average systolic BP was significantly higher (p = 0.007) for SUP (110.0 +/- 3.9 mmHg) compared to P (107.3 +/- 4.4 mmHg). No differences were seen in HR, diastolic BP, or POMS at any time point.
conclusionsResults showed a significant increase in energy expenditure in young, healthy women following an acute ingestion of a high-energy drink.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.