ArticleJournal of endocrinological investigation2014
Trained and untrained males show reliable salivary testosterone responses to a physical stimulus, but not a psychological stimulus.
Article in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Testosterone supplementation and body composition: results from a meta-analysis of observational studies.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2016Pooled it
- Salivary Biosensing Opportunities for Predicting Cognitive and Physical Human Performance.Biosensors · 2025Article
- No relationship between the digit ratios (2D:4D) and salivary testosterone change: Study on men under an acute exercise.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe testosterone (T) responses to a physical stimulus are thought to be more stable and reproducible compared to a psychological stimulus. PURPOSE: This study compared the salivary T (Sal-T) responses to both stimuli in four groups of men: professional rugby players (n = 17), recreational rugby players (n = 10), a mixed athlete group (n = 14) and untrained controls (n = 12).
methodsEach group completed three treatments: (1) watching a video with aggressive rugby footage, (2) performing a short bout of sprint exercise and (3) a control session. Saliva samples were taken before and 15 min after each treatment.
resultsThe sprint exercise changes in Sal-T levels were similar in the elite rugby (17.1 ± 11.1%), recreational rugby (11.9 ± 15.9%), mixed athlete (27.6 ± 32.0%) and control groups (25.3 ± 23.6%). In response to the video, Sal-T increased in the elite rugby (6.9 ± 6.4%) and untrained groups (11.9 ± 13.5%), but decreased in the recreational rugby players (-7.5 ± 11.0%). The individual Sal-T responses to the sprints were also correlated (r = 0.69 to 0.82) with other treatment responses.
conclusionsSprint exercise had a more consistent effect on Sal-T than a video with aggressive content and thus, could provide a reliable stimulus for increasing T availability in men with different training backgrounds. Individual Sal-T reactivity also appears to be somewhat stable across different treatments. These data provide further understanding around the induction, moderation and interpretation of T physiology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25200995What 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.