Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38831140›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2024

Effects of food bar chewing duration on the physiologic, metabolic, and perceptual responses to moderate-intensity running.

Thomas R Geaney, Zachary A Sievert, J David Branch, Patrick B Wilson

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

4 authors.

Thomas R GeaneyHuman Performance Laboratory, School of Exercise Science, College of Health Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA.
Zachary A SievertDepartment of Rehabilitation, Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, College of Allied Health Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45221, USA.
J David BranchHuman Performance Laboratory, School of Exercise Science, College of Health Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA.
Patrick B WilsonHuman Performance Laboratory, School of Exercise Science, College of Health Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA. pbwilson@odu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4052-5023

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeChewing duration can affect food particle size, gastric processing, and postprandial glycemia, but these effects have not been investigated with exercise. This study examined how the chewing duration of a food bar impacts glycemic and metabolic responses, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, psychological affect, and performance during endurance running.

methodsThis randomized, unblinded, crossover study had 15 males (35.2 ± 7.4 years, VO

resultsPost-prandial blood glucose, GI symptoms, and RPE increased over time, but there were no significant between-condition or condition-by-time effects. TTE showed no significant between-condition effect (20CHEW: 288 ± 133 s; 40CHEW: 335 ± 299 s; p = 0.240). Overall feeling demonstrated a time-by-condition effect (p = 0.006), suggesting possible better maintenance over time with 40CHEW.

conclusionCumulatively, the results suggest that extended chewing minimally impacts physiology, perceptions, and performance during 60 min moderate-intensity running.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseMasticationRunningAdultCross-Over StudiesHumansMaleOxygen ConsumptionPhysical ExertionBlood GlucoseCarbohydrateExerciseGutMetabolismSport nutrition

Identifiers

PMID38831140
PMCPMC11467068

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.