| Title |
Acute effects of caffeine-containing energy drinks on physical performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nutrition, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00394-016-1331-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diego B. Souza, Juan Del Coso, Juliano Casonatto, Marcos D. Polito |
| Abstract |
Caffeine-containing energy drinks (EDs) are currently used as ergogenic aids to improve physical performance in a wide variety of sport disciplines. However, the outcomes of previous investigations on this topic are inconclusive due to methodological differences, especially, in the dosage of the active ingredients and the test used to assess performance. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the effects of acute ED intake on physical performance. The search for references was conducted in the databases PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge and SPORTDiscus until December 2015. Thirty-four studies published between 1998 and 2015 were included in the analysis. Using a random-effects model, effect sizes (ES) were calculated as the standardized mean difference. Overall, ED ingestion improved physical performance in muscle strength and endurance (ES = 0.49; p < 0.001), endurance exercise tests (ES = 0.53; p < 0.001), jumping (ES = 0.29; p = 0.01) and sport-specific actions (ES = 0.51; p < 0.001), but not in sprinting (ES = 0.14; p = 0.06). The meta-regression demonstrated a significant association between taurine dosage (mg) and performance (slope = 0.0001; p = 0.04), but not between caffeine dosage (mg) and performance (slope = 0.0009; p = 0.21). ED ingestion improved performance in muscle strength and endurance, endurance exercise tests, jumping and sport-specific actions. However, the improvement in performance was associated with taurine dosage. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 18% |
| Spain | 6 | 11% |
| United States | 4 | 7% |
| Ecuador | 3 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 60% |
| Scientists | 15 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 311 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 310 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 66 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 10% |
| Researcher | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 41 | 13% |
| Unknown | 93 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 84 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 33 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 31 | 10% |
| Unknown | 102 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2024.
All research outputs
#751,787
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nutrition
#210
of 2,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,166
of 325,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nutrition
#5
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,713 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,096 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.