Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34687438›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Extracellular Buffering Supplements to Improve Exercise Capacity and Performance: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Luana Farias de Oliveira, Eimear Dolan, Paul A Swinton, Krzysztof Durkalec-Michalski, Guilherme G Artioli, Lars R McNaughton, Bryan Saunders

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Luana Farias de OliveiraApplied Physiology & Nutrition Research Group, Rheumatology Division, Faculty of Medicine FMUSP, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8225-5784
Eimear DolanApplied Physiology & Nutrition Research Group, Rheumatology Division, Faculty of Medicine FMUSP, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1018-7601
Paul A SwintonSchool of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9663-0696
Krzysztof Durkalec-MichalskiDepartment of Sports Dietetics, Poznań University of Physical Education, Poznań, Poland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5041-2981
Guilherme G ArtioliDepartment of Life Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, John Dalton Building, Manchester, M1 5GD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8463-2213
Lars R McNaughtonSports Nutrition and Performance Group, Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK.
Bryan SaundersApplied Physiology & Nutrition Research Group, Rheumatology Division, Faculty of Medicine FMUSP, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. drbryansaunders@outlook.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0995-9077
Universidade de São Paulo · BREdge Hill University · GBManchester Metropolitan University · GBRobert Gordon University · GBUniversity of Life Sciences in Poznań · PL

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (BR) 2016/50438-0Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (BR) 2019/05616Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (BR) 2019/25032-9Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (BR) 2019/26899-6Polish National Science Centre 2018/02/X/NZ7/03217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExtracellular buffering supplements [sodium bicarbonate (SB), sodium citrate (SC), sodium/calcium lactate (SL/CL)] are ergogenic supplements, although questions remain about factors which may modify their effect.

objectiveTo quantify the main effect of extracellular buffering agents on exercise outcomes, and to investigate the influence of potential moderators on this effect using a systematic review and meta-analytic approach.

methodsThis study was designed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Three databases were searched for articles that were screened according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. Bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis and meta-regression models were used to investigate pooled effects of supplementation and moderating effects of a range of factors on exercise and biomarker responses.

results189 articles with 2019 participants were included, 158 involving SB supplementation, 30 with SC, and seven with CL/SL; four studies provided a combination of buffering supplements together. Supplementation led to a mean estimated increase in blood bicarbonate of + 5.2 mmol L

conclusionsExtracellular buffering supplements generate large increases in blood bicarbonate concentration leading to positive overall effects on exercise, with sodium bicarbonate being most effective. Evidence for several group-level moderating factors were identified. These data can guide an athlete's decision as to whether supplementation with buffering agents might be beneficial for their specific aims.

Indexed as

Exercise TolerancePerformance-Enhancing SubstancesBayes TheoremDietary SupplementsHumansSodium BicarbonatePerformance-Enhancing SubstancesSodium Bicarbonate

Identifiers

PMID34687438
OpenAlexW3207159354

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.