MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1877623283 · doi:10.13034/jsst.v8i2.75

How Does Caffeine Supplementation Affect Muscular Performance in Adolescent Males?

2015· article· en· W1877623283 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jamaal Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Science and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaffeineEnergy expenditureAffect (linguistics)MedicineFood scienceHumanitiesPsychologyArtChemistryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caffeine consumption has become increasingly popular among children, adolescents, and young adults around the world 15. Many consumers indicate that they ingest caffeinated beverages to increase their energy and compensate for insufficient sleep. The most common forms of supplementation include coffee, soda and energy drinks such as “Monster Energy” and “Red Bull”. Increased caffeinated beverage consumption, especially among youth, is controversial due to concerns surrounding the safety and effectiveness of caffeine supplementation. Caffeinated products are often marketed as enhancing physical performance; This review investigates the efficacy of caffeine supplementation on muscular performance, specifically in terms of muscle strength and endurance. The results demonstrate a variable response to caffeine, with multiple studies demonstrating an increase in muscular strength or endurance, while others showed no effect. Overall, studies lacked consistent evidence to support the hypothesis that caffeine supplementation has beneficial effects on muscular performance, regardless of the dose administered.La consomption du caféine est devenue très populaire parmi les enfants, les adolescents, et les adultes autour du monde. Plusieurs consommateurs indiquent qu'ils boivent les boissons raffinés comme source d'énergie ou pour remplacer le manque de sommeil. Les formes de caféine plus communes incluent le café, le soda, et les boissons d'énergie comme “Monster Energy” et “Red Bull”. L'augmentation des boissons cafféinés, particulièrement parmi les jeunes, est en controverse au sujet de l'efficace et sécurité de sa consomption. On voit souvent les avertissements des produits cafféinés comme les compléments actifs. Dans cette revue, j'ai examiné l'efficace de caféine comme complément actif pour la performance musculaire, particulièrement au sujet de la puissance et endurance. Les résultats démontrent une réponse variée au caféine ou quelques sujets ont obtenu une amélioration en leur puissance et endurance musculaire, mais autres sujets n'ont pas démontré des changements. En général, les recherches manquent l'évidence cohérent pour appuyer l'hypothèse que la consomption du caféine produit les effets avantageux au sujet de la performance musculaire, peu importe le dosage utilisé.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Student Science and TechnologySame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207