Creatine monohydrate supplementation does not increase muscle strength, lean body mass, or muscle phosphocreatine in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creatine monohydrate (CrM) supplementation may increase strength in some types of muscular dystrophy. A recent study in myotonic muscular dystrophy type 1 (DM1) did not find a significant treatment effect, but measurements of muscle phosphocreatine (PCr) were not performed. We completed a randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial using 34 genetically confirmed adult DM1 patients without significant cognitive impairment. Participants received CrM (5 g, approximately 0.074 g/kg daily) and a placebo for each 4-month phase with a 6-week wash-out. Spirometry, manual muscle testing, quantitative isometric strength testing of handgrip, foot dorsiflexion, and knee extension, handgrip and foot dorsiflexion endurance, functional tasks, activity of daily living scales, body composition (total, bone, and fat-free mass), serum creatine kinase activity, serum creatinine concentration and clearance, and liver function tests were completed before and after each intervention, and muscle PCr/beta-adenosine triphosphate (ATP) ratios of the forearm flexor muscles were completed at the end of each phase. CrM supplementation did not increase any of the outcome measurements except for plasma creatinine concentration (but not creatinine clearance). Thus, CrM supplementation at 5 g daily does not have any effects on muscle strength, body composition, or activities of daily living in patients with DM1, perhaps because of a failure of the supplementation to increase muscle PCr/beta-ATP content.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it