Creatine monohydrate ingested daily compared to only on training days on body composition, muscle thickness, and strength after 12 weeks of resistance training: preliminary results
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Creatine monohydrate (Cr) supplementation in conjunction with resistance training is one of the most widely used strategies to increase lean tissue mass and muscle performance. However, whether the frequency of Cr ingestion (e.g. daily vs. only on training days) alters the efficacy of Cr supplementation remains to be elucidated. Therefore, the purpose was to investigate the effects of 12-weeks of resistance training with creatine taken either daily or taken only on training days on body composition, muscle thickness, and strength in healthy trained young men and women.Methods Preliminary data of an outgoing recruitment in six trained young adults (27 ± 3 y; n = 3 women; n = 3 men) were collected. Participants performed supervised resistance training (3 times per week) for 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 5 g of Cr daily or 5 g only on training days. Resistance training sessions consisted of full-body routines, three sets of 8–12 repetitions, at 2–3 repetitions in reserve. A certified trainer supervised all sessions. Loads were adjusted every 2 weeks to maintain exercise intensity. Assessments of body composition were done by bioelectric impedance (InBody), muscle thickness measures at the vastus lateralis (VL), pectoralis major, biceps brachii, and triceps brachii were done via ultrasound, and muscle strength was determined via isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) (Hawkin Dynamics, USA) and isokinetic knee extension torques before and after 12-weeks of training.Results There were no significant changes over time or between groups for body fat % (Group 1: Pre: 17.3 ± 7.1%, Post: 19 ± 7.6%, p = 0.10; Group 2: Pre: 20.9 ± 13.3%, Post: 18.7 ± 12%, p = 0.60) or skeletal muscle mass (Group 1: Pre: 27.5 ± 8.6 kg, Post: 27.8 ± 9.1 kg, p = 0.59; Group 2: Pre: 28.6 ± 9.5 kg, Post: 29.4 ± 10.1, p = 0.21). There was a significant main effect of time for muscle thickness at the VL (Group 1: Pre: 2.31 ± 0.11 cm, Post: 2.62 ± 0.0 cm, p = 0.03; Group 2: Pre: 2.5 ± 0.11 cm, Post: 2.8 ± 0.25 cm, p = 0.03), pectoralis major (Group 1: Pre: 1.28 ± 0.72 cm, Post: 1.52 ± 0.62, p = 0.04; Group 2: Pre: 1.3 ± 0.16 cm, Post: 1.5 ± 0.28 cm, p = 0.03) and triceps brachii (Group 1: Pre: 0.89 ± 0.72 cm, Post: 1.31 ± 0.82 cm, p = 0.009; Group 2: Pre: 1.5 ± 0.70 cm, Post: 2.0 ± 0.69 cm, p = 0.004), while no time or group differences where observed for the biceps brachii. There were also no differences over time or between groups for the IMTP (Group 1: Pre: 1794 ± 447.5N, Post: 1886 ± 443.6N, p = 0.10; Group 2: Pre: 2011 ± 511.4N, Post: 2035 ± 568.5N, p = 0.62). The left leg isokinetic knee extension torque significantly increased only in group 1 (Group 1: Pre: 133.3 ± 38.6 Nm, Post: 175.7 ± 32.6 Nm, p = 0.02; Group 2: Pre: 152.3 ± 35.6 Nm, Post: 149 ± 568.5 Nm, p = 0.84), while there were no changes on the right leg (Group 1 p = 0.09 and Group 2 p = 0.79).Conclusion Overall, there were similar responses following 12 weeks of resistance training between creatine ingestion strategies (daily vs. only on training days). However, caution is warranted based on the small sample size and low statistical power.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».