SynthesisPeerJ2025
Effects of creatine supplementation on muscle strength gains-a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standard Therapy Plus Adjunctive Vegan Lifestyle Intervention in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Case Report.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Dietary and nutritional supplementation strategies for table tennis athletes: a mini-review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Creatine (Cr) is a widely utilized nutritional supplement. Empirical evidence indicates that Cr supplementation significantly elevates intramuscular Cr content, thereby providing an energy substrate reservoir for exercise performance and facilitating improvements in muscle strength. Although numerous studies have examined the relationship between Cr and muscle strength, comprehensive investigations into population-specific ergogenic responses, optimal Cr dosage, and concomitant training intensity remain limited. These parameters are critical determinants for maximizing the efficacy of Cr supplementation. Against this backdrop, this study adopts meta-analysis, integrating conventional and Robust Variance Estimation (RVE) models, to comprehensively evaluate the intervention effects of Cr supplementation across three dimensions: population applicability, dosage optimization, and training intensity (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024547697). It aims to provide evidence-based support for precise clinical application and subsequent research directions. Results: Results showed no statistical difference in baseline muscle strength between the Cr intervention group and the control group; after intervention, the Cr group exhibited significant strength gains. Further subgroup analysis revealed: untrained individuals had greater muscle strength improvements than trained ones; the low-to-moderate dose group showed better effects than the high-dose group; high-intensity training had more significant effect sizes than low-intensity training; and no definitive conclusion was reached on muscle strength improvements between middle-aged/elderly and young populations. Conclusion: Cr supplementation significantly improves muscle strength in the general population. Specifically: untrained individuals show greater muscle strength improvements; low-dose supplementation combined with high-intensity exercise yields better effects; no definitive conclusion was reached on effect differences between middle-aged/elderly and young populations, requiring larger-sample studies for more precise effect size analysis.
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.