The effect of a carbohydrate–caffeine sports drink on simulated golf performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A round of golf lasts approximately 4 h, during which time homeostasis could be challenged through either hypoglycemia or hypohydration. This might result in impaired motor skill or cognitive performance. Given the high cognitive demand of putting and the potential fatiguing effects from prolonged walking, the combination of a caffeine and carbohydrate drink could be beneficial in offsetting hypoglycemia and hypohydration. This study used a laboratory-simulated round of golf to examine the effect of an isotonic carbohydrate and caffeine sports drink on putting performance during a round of golf. After institutional ethics approval, 20 male golfers (mean +/- standard deviation: age 23 +/- 4 years, stature 176.4 +/- 5.6 cm, mass 72.8 +/- 17.4 kg, handicap 15 +/- 4, daily caffeine consumption 157.3 +/- 47.2 mg) consumed either an isotonic sports drink containing caffeine (6.4 g carbohydrate and 16 mg caffeine per 100 mL) or a no-energy, flavour-matched placebo drink in a double-blind, randomized, counter-balanced crossover design . Drinks were consumed preround (5 mL.kg-1 body mass (BM)) and at holes 6 and 12 (2.5 mL.kg-1 BM). Participants therefore consumed 1.6 mg.kg-1 BM of caffeine and 0.64 g.kg-1 BM of carbohydrate throughout the trial. Five and 2 m putting performance were assessed at each hole. Self-rated mood assessments were carried out every third hole. Putting performance over 5 m and 2 m and self-rated scores for alertness and relaxation showed a main effect for drink (p < 0.05). Ratings of mental fatigue and tiredness significantly increased during the round (p < 0.001). In experienced golfers, the consumption of an isotonic carbohydrate sports drink containing caffeine prior to and during a round of golf improved putting performance and increased feelings of alertness.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".