ReviewAmino acids2011
Analysis of the efficacy, safety, and regulatory status of novel forms of creatine.
Review in Amino acids, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
68 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 171 citations in OpenAlex.
- Creatine supplementation protocols with or without training interventions on body composition: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of dietary supplements on athletic performance in elite soccer players: a systematic review.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2023Pooled it
- Creatine in Health and Disease.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- Risk of Adverse Outcomes in Females Taking Oral Creatine Monohydrate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- Creatine supplementation and aging musculoskeletal health.Endocrine · 2014Pooled it
- Creatine formulations and repeated sprint training: effects on physical and physiological adaptations in soccer players during the short-term preparation phase.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Trial
- Effects of creatine supplementation with and without exercise and diet intervention on body composition, cognitive function, and markers of health in middle-aged and older adults.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Supplementing With Which Form of Creatine (Hydrochloride or Monohydrate) Alongside Resistance Training Can Have More Impacts on Anabolic/Catabolic Hormones, Strength and Body Composition?Physiological research · 2024Trial
- Combined Impact of Creatine, Caffeine, and Variable Resistance on Repeated Sprint Ability in Young Soccer Players.Nutrients · 2024Trial
- Effects of a Low Dose of Orally Administered Creatine Monohydrate on Post-Fatigue Muscle Power in Young Soccer Players.Nutrients · 2024Trial
- The effects of creatine supplementation on cognitive performance-a randomised controlled study.BMC medicine · 2023Trial
- Pharmacokinetic Analyses of Liposomal and Non-Liposomal Multivitamin/Mineral Formulations.Nutrients · 2023Trial
- Trial
- The effects of phosphocreatine disodium salts plus blueberry extract supplementation on muscular strength, power, and endurance.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2021Trial
- The Effects of Long-Term Magnesium Creatine Chelate Supplementation on Repeated Sprint Ability (RAST) in Elite Soccer Players.Nutrients · 2020Trial
- Hematological and Hemodynamic Responses to Acute and Short-Term Creatine Nitrate Supplementation.Nutrients · 2017Trial
- The emerging and evolving evidence supporting creatine as an ergogenic aid: history and applications.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Review
- Impact of creatine supplementation on kidney health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Exogenous creatine supplementation promotes tumor metastasis via megakaryocyte creatine kinase B-STAT5B signaling.Nature communications · 2026Article
8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Creatine has become one of the most popular dietary supplements in the sports nutrition market. The form of creatine that has been most extensively studied and commonly used in dietary supplements is creatine monohydrate (CM). Studies have consistently indicated that CM supplementation increases muscle creatine and phosphocreatine concentrations by approximately 15-40%, enhances anaerobic exercise capacity, and increases training volume leading to greater gains in strength, power, and muscle mass. A number of potential therapeutic benefits have also been suggested in various clinical populations. Studies have indicated that CM is not degraded during normal digestion and that nearly 99% of orally ingested CM is either taken up by muscle or excreted in urine. Further, no medically significant side effects have been reported in literature. Nevertheless, supplement manufacturers have continually introduced newer forms of creatine into the marketplace. These newer forms have been purported to have better physical and chemical properties, bioavailability, efficacy, and/or safety profiles than CM. However, there is little to no evidence that any of the newer forms of creatine are more effective and/or safer than CM whether ingested alone and/or in combination with other nutrients. In addition, whereas the safety, efficacy, and regulatory status of CM is clearly defined in almost all global markets; the safety, efficacy, and regulatory status of other forms of creatine present in today's marketplace as a dietary or food supplement is less clear.
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.