Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30604177›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of nutrition2019

Supplements with purported effects on muscle mass and strength.

Pedro L Valenzuela, Javier S Morales, Enzo Emanuele, Helios Pareja-Galeano, Alejandro Lucia

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Response of VOPhysiological reports · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Pedro L Valenzuela *Department of Sport and Health, Spanish Agency for Health Protection in Sport (AEPSAD), Madrid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1730-3369
Javier S Morales *Faculty of Sport Sciences, Universidad Europea De Madrid, Villaviciosa De Odón, 28670, Madrid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3255-3246
Enzo Emanuele2E Science, Robbio, Pavia, Italy.
Helios Pareja-GaleanoFaculty of Sport Sciences, Universidad Europea De Madrid, Villaviciosa De Odón, 28670, Madrid, Spain. helios.pareja@universidadeuropea.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5780-2712
Alejandro LuciaFaculty of Sport Sciences, Universidad Europea De Madrid, Villaviciosa De Odón, 28670, Madrid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3025-2060
Research Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre · ESPavia nel Cuore · ITUniversidad de Alcalá · ESUniversidad Europea de Madrid · ES

Funding

Cátedra Real Madrid-Universidad Europea 2017/RM03Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI15/00558Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte FPU14/03435Universidad de Alcalá FPI2016Universidad Europea de Madrid 2017/UEM05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSeveral supplements are purported to promote muscle hypertrophy and strength gains in healthy subjects, or to prevent muscle wasting in atrophying situations (e.g., ageing or disuse periods). However, their effectiveness remains unclear.

methodsThis review summarizes the available evidence on the beneficial impacts of several popular supplements on muscle mass or strength.

resultsAmong the supplements tested, nitrate and caffeine returned sufficient evidence supporting their acute beneficial effects on muscle strength, whereas the long-term consumption of creatine, protein and polyunsaturated fatty acids seems to consistently increase or preserve muscle mass and strength (evidence level A). On the other hand, mixed or unclear evidence was found for several popular supplements including branched-chain amino acids, adenosine triphosphate, citrulline, β-Hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate, minerals, most vitamins, phosphatidic acid or arginine (evidence level B), weak or scarce evidence was found for conjugated linoleic acid, glutamine, resveratrol, tribulus terrestris or ursolic acid (evidence level C), and no evidence was found for other supplements such as ornithine or α-ketoglutarate (evidence D). Of note, although most supplements appear to be safe when consumed at typical doses, some adverse events have been reported for some of them (e.g., caffeine, vitamins, α-ketoglutarate, tribulus terrestris, arginine) after large intakes, and there is insufficient evidence to determine the safety of many frequently used supplements (e.g., ornithine, conjugated linoleic acid, ursolic acid).

conclusionIn summary, despite their popularity, there is little evidence supporting the use of most supplements, and some of them have been even proven ineffective or potentially associated with adverse effects.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsCaffeineCreatineFatty Acids, UnsaturatedHumansMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthMuscular AtrophyNitratesProteinsCaffeineCreatineFatty Acids, UnsaturatedNitratesProteinsErgogenic aidHypertrophyPrevention of atrophyProtein supplementationSarcopeniaSkeletal muscle

Identifiers

PMID30604177
OpenAlexW2907846515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.