Trial reportJournal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition2019
Citrus Aurantium and caffeine complex versus placebo on biomarkers of metabolism: a double blind crossover design.
Trial report in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 2019. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Bitter OrangeFrontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgrouondThe purpose of this study was to examine resting the metabolic response to the ingestion of a complex containing Citrus Aurantium + Caffeine (CA + C) and if its consumption influences metabolic recovery following a high-intensity anaerobic exercise bout in habitual caffeine users.
methodsTen physically active males (25.1 ± 3.9 years; weight 78.71 ± 9.53 kg; height 177.2 ± 4.6 cm; body fat 15.5 ± 3.13%) participated in this study. This study was performed in a double-blind, randomized crossover fashion consisting of two exhaustive exercise protocols. On each visit the participants consumed either a CA + C (100 mg of CA and 100 mg of C) or placebo (dextrose) capsule. After consumption, participants were monitored throughout a 45-min ingestion period, then completed a repeated Wingate protocol, and were then monitored throughout a 45-min recovery period. Metabolic function was measured through blood glucose, plasma insulin, plasma triglycerides, and plasma catecholamines: epinephrine (E) and norepinephrine (NE). Biomarkers were taken at four different time points; Ingestion period: baseline (I1), post-ingestion period (I2); Recovery period: immediately post-exercise (R1), post-recovery period (R2).
resultsA repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant time-dependent increases in plasma E and NE at I2 only in the CA + C trial (p < 0.05), and a significant decrease in blood glucose at I2 in the PLA trial (p < 0.05); however, no meaningful changes in glucose was observed following CA + C ingestion. No changes in insulin or triglycerides were observed during the ingestion period. No trial-dependent differences were observed in the Recovery period. All biomarkers of metabolic recovery were equivalent when evaluating R1 v R2. Participants recovered in a similar time-dependent manner in all markers of metabolism following the PLA and CA + C trials.
conclusionThe findings of this study suggested that normal recommended dosages of 100 mg CA + 100 mg C is sufficient to promote glucose sparing at rest, with modest increases in SNS activity; however, the individual role of CA or C in this response cannot be determined.
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.