MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effects Of An Energy Drink On Performance Of Varsity Hockey Players.

2009· article· en· W2017828221 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie K. O'Neill, Jonathon R. Fowles, René J.L. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyPlaceboPhysical therapyAthletesTest (biology)PlyometricsPsychologyMedicineJumpPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of varsity athletes may use commonly available stimulant supplements as a means to attempt to improve performance in their sport. PURPOSE: To assess the effects of consuming 250 ml of a commercially available energy drink or a placebo on game type performance in varsity hockey players. METHODS: 20 varsity hockey players (Mean±SD; 22.1±1.1 years, 181.3±4.8 cm, 88.2±7.2 kg, 11.2±3.6% body fat, and 17.2±1.2 years of playing experience) volunteered to participate in a double blind, placebo controlled study. Participants reported to the arena at 4pm and received either a placebo drink or the energy drink. At 4:30pm, they performed a Reed Repeat skating test and then participated in a ∼60 min standardized hockey practice led by 3 coaches. The last 20 min was a scrimmage and their performance was rated from best to worst by 3 coaches blinded on the treatment received. Following the on-ice tests, the players removed their hockey gear and performed a 60 sec Bosco jump test. 48 hours later, after following the same diet as on the first testing day, the players performed the exact same procedures following consumption of the other treatment drink. RESULTS: There were no significant (p<0.05) changes in Reed Repeat skate test fastest time on ice, on-ice drop off, fatigue index and total time, or in ranks during practice/ scrimmage, or in Bosco jump test peak height, relative power and fatigue index between energy drink and placebo treatments. Because some (n=7) were regular users of energy drinks, we also analyzed the results between users and non-users. There was a trend (p=0.088) indicating that users performed better according to the coaches' ranks when consuming the energy drink while non-users tended to be ranked lower when consuming the drink. CONCLUSION: Compared to a placebo, consumption of a commercially available energy drink 30 min prior to a hockey practice does not improve or harm performance for approximately 2 hours in varsity hockey players.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicMuscle metabolism and nutrition→French-language works237,207→