ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2023
Post-exercise rehydration: Comparing the efficacy of three commercial oral rehydration solutions.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of carbohydrate-electrolyte solutions with and without L-menthol on hydration and performance recovery following simulated firefighting exercise.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Trial
- Post-exercise rehydration: a randomized cross-over trial comparing a 100% fruit juice, a glucose-based sports drink, and water.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Article
- The Impact of a Commercial Electrolyte Beverage on the Hydration Status of Active Men and Women.Nutrients · 2025Article
- From Food Supplements to Functional Foods: Emerging Perspectives on Post-Exercise Recovery Nutrition.Nutrients · 2024Review
- Compositional Aspects of Beverages Designed to Promote Hydration Before, During, and After Exercise: Concepts Revisited.Nutrients · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study compared the efficacy of three commercial oral rehydration solutions (ORS) for restoring fluid and electrolyte balance, after exercise-induced dehydration. Method: Healthy, active participants ( Results: Net fluid balance peaked at 4 h and was greater in AA-ORS (141 ± 155 ml) and G-ORS (101 ± 195 ml) than Z-ORS (-47 ± 208 ml; Conclusion: when provided in a volume equivalent to 125% of exercise-induced fluid loss, AA-ORS produced comparable/superior fluid balance and superior sodium/chloride balance responses to popular glucose-based and sugar-free ORS.
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.