Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34417881›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of applied physiology2021

A critical review of citrulline malate supplementation and exercise performance.

Lewis A Gough, S Andy Sparks, Lars R McNaughton, Matthew F Higgins, Josh W Newbury, Eric Trexler, Mark A Faghy, Craig A Bridge

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of applied physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lewis A GoughResearch Centre for Life and Sport Science (CLaSS), Human Performance and Health Research Group, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK. lewis.gough@bcu.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1115-7559
S Andy SparksSports Nutrition and Performance Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK.
Lars R McNaughtonSports Nutrition and Performance Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK.
Matthew F HigginsUniversity of Derby, Derby, UK.
Josh W NewburyResearch Centre for Life and Sport Science (CLaSS), Human Performance and Health Research Group, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK.
Eric TrexlerStronger By Science LLC, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Mark A FaghyHuman Sciences Research Centre, University of Derby, Derby, UK.
Craig A BridgeSports Nutrition and Performance Research Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK.
Edge Hill University · GBBirmingham City University · GBUniversity of Derby · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a nitric oxide (NO) enhancer, citrulline malate (CM) has recently been touted as a potential ergogenic aid to both resistance and high-intensity exercise performance, as well as the recovery of muscular performance. The mechanism has been associated with enhanced blood flow to active musculature, however, it might be more far-reaching as either ammonia homeostasis could be improved, or ATP production could be increased via greater availability of malate. Moreover, CM might improve muscle recovery via increased nutrient delivery and/or removal of waste products. To date, a single acute 8 g dose of CM on either resistance exercise performance or cycling has been the most common approach, which has produced equivocal results. This makes the effectiveness of CM to improve exercise performance difficult to determine. Reasons for the disparity in conclusions seem to be due to methodological discrepancies such as the testing protocols and the associated test-retest reliability, dosing strategy (i.e., amount and timing), and the recent discovery of quality control issues with some manufacturers stated (i.e., citrulline:malate ratios). Further exploration of the optimal dose is therefore required including quantification of the bioavailability of NO, citrulline, and malate following ingestion of a range of CM doses. Similarly, further well-controlled studies using highly repeatable exercise protocols with a large aerobic component are required to assess the mechanisms associated with this supplement appropriately. Until such studies are completed, the efficacy of CM supplementation to improve exercise performance remains ambiguous.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceCitrullineDietary SupplementsHumansMalatesPerformance-Enhancing SubstancesCitrullinecitrulline malateMalatesPerformance-Enhancing SubstancesHigh-intensity exerciseMetabolismNitric oxideResistance trainingSupplements

Identifiers

PMID34417881
PMCPMC8571142
OpenAlexW3196283446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.