ArticleJournal of athletic training2015
Acute stimulant ingestion and neurocognitive performance in healthy participants.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- The Effect of an Acute Bout of Moderate-Intensity Aerobic Exercise on Motor Learning of a Continuous Tracking Task.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Effects of a history of headache and migraine treatment on baseline neurocognitive function in young athletes.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Article
- Analytical Challenges and Metrological Approaches to Ensuring Dietary Supplement Quality: International Perspectives.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextConcussion management has become an area of great concern in athletics, and neurocognitive tests, such as Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT), are commonly used as management tools. Given the restrictive nature of current management plans, anecdotal concerns have been raised about athletes trying to cheat the assessments and return to participation sooner. Stimulants have been shown to improve neurocognitive measures similar to those used in ImPACT. Therefore, they could possibly improve performance during baseline and postinjury testing.
objectiveTo examine the effects of a supplement containing stimulants on ImPACT performance.
designCrossover study.
settingResearch laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsA total of 5 men (age = 20.6 ± 1.5 years, height = 176.3 ± 9.6 cm, mass = 76.9 ± 18.6 kg) and 7 women (age = 20.6 ± 1.1 years, height = 162.9 ± 7.8 cm, mass = 60.9 ± 8.2 kg) with no histories of physician-diagnosed head injury, learning disability, or attention-deficit disorder. INTERVENTION(S): Participants were assessed under supplement (5.5 g of Jacked 3D, which contains caffeine and 1,3-dimethylamylamine), placebo, and control conditions separated by 1 week. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): I compared ImPACT composite scores for verbal and visual memory, visual motor speed, reaction time, impulse control, and a cognitive-efficiency index under each of the 3 conditions and assessed them 30 minutes after ingestion.
resultsI observed a difference when comparing reaction times, as the participants reacted faster during the supplement condition (0.53 ± 0.03 seconds) than during the placebo (0.55 ± 0.03 seconds) and control (0.55 ± 0.03 seconds) conditions (F2,22 = 4.31, P = .03). A difference also was observed for the cognitive-efficiency index, as participants scored higher during the supplement condition (0.49 ± 0.09) than during the placebo (0.41 ± 0.10) and control (0.41 ± 0.12) conditions (F2,22 = 4.07, P = .03).
conclusionsStimulant ingestion 30 minutes before testing resulted in improved memory, visual processing speed, and reaction time. However, the improvements were relatively nominal, and the question of clinical importance remains. Thus, it is unclear if stimulant ingestion would affect the return-to-participation progression.
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.