ArticlePhysiological reports2026
Enhanced but not superior: Performance outcomes from the inaugural enhanced games.
Article in Physiological reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Enhanced Games (TEG) emerged as an athletic event engineered to profit from biotechnological enhancement, such as performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) utilization, relying on three premises: shattering world records (WR), enabling athletes to surpass their personal bests (PB), and utilizing PEDs to offset age-related physical decline. The effectiveness of TEG's PED protocols in achieving these three premises was evaluated. This is a retrospective analysis from 42 TEG athletes across Track, Swimming, and Weightlifting. TEG's performances were compared to current WR and athletes' PB previous to TEG. The anti-aging PED effects were evaluated by the relationship between the age and performance gaps from PB to TEG competition. Athletes' previous PBs were -5.92% ± 4.68% worse than current WR, which further deteriorated to -8.91% ± 7.52% after TEG, and a single WR was broken. Whereas 19 new PBs were recorded, TEG performances were on average -2.86% ± 7.39% worse than previous PB. Some competitive results were achieved by non-enhanced athletes. Performance decline continued linearly as the time elapsed since the athletes' physical prime (i.e., age at PB). TEG failed to deliver on core promises of widespread WR and broad athletic enhancement, and PED protocol did not attenuate expected age-related performance declines.
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.