MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055293048 · doi:10.1139/h06-030

Wingate performance and surface EMG frequency variables are not affected by caffeine ingestion

2006· article· en· W2055293048 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaffeineIngestionAnalysis of varianceWingate testPlaceboAnimal scienceElectromyographyCyclingIntensity (physics)Repeated measures designChemistryMedicineAnesthesiaInternal medicinePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnaerobic exerciseMathematicsBiologyStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ergogenic effect of caffeine and its mechanism of action on short-term, high-intensity exercise are controversial. One proposed mechanism is caffeine's stimulatory effect on the central nervous system and thus, motor-unit excitation. The latter is non-invasively determined from surface electromyographic signal (EMG) frequency measures. The purpose of this study was to determine if power output and surface EMG frequency variables during high-intensity cycling were altered following caffeine ingestion. Eighteen recreationally active college males (mean +/- SD age, 21.5 +/- 1.8 y; height, 181.8 +/- 0.5 cm; body mass, 84.7 +/- 11.4 kg) performed the Wingate test (WG) after ingestion of gelatin capsules containing either placebo (PL; dextrose) or caffeine (CAFF; 5 mg/kg body mass). The trials were separated by 1 week and subjects were asked to withdraw from all caffeine-containing products for 48 h before each trial. From the resulting power-time records, peak power (PP; highest power output in 5 s), minimum power (MP; lowest power output in 5 s), and the percent decline in power (Pd) were calculated. Surface EMG records of the right vastus lateralis (VL) and the gastrocnemius (GA) muscles corresponding to the PP and MP periods were collected and used to determine the integrated electromyogram (IEMG), the mean (MNPF), and the median (MDPF) of the signal's power spectrum. A 2-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) (treatment x time) was conducted to determine the effect of caffeine on these variables across levels of time. Caffeine ingestion had no effect on PP (PL, 1049 +/- 192 W; CAFF, 1098 +/- 198 W), MP (PL, 762 +/- 104 W; CAFF, 802 +/- 124 W), or the Pd (PL, 47% +/- 8.9%; CAFF, 48.2% +/- 7.3%) compared with the placebo. For both muscles, MNPF and MDPF diminished significantly (p < 0.001) across time and to a similar degree in both the CAFF and PL trials. Regardless of muscle, CAFF had no effect on the percent change in IEMG from the first 5 s to the last 5 s. For both treatments, the GA displayed a significantly (p < 0.05) greater pre vs. post percent decline in the EMG signal amplitude compared with the VL. These results indicate that caffeine does not impact power output during a 30 s high-intensity cycling bout. Furthermore, these data suggest that caffeine does not impact the neuromuscular drive as indicated by the similar IEMG scores between treatments. Similarly, caffeine does not seem to impact the frequency content of the surface EMG signal and thus the nature of recruited motor units before and after the expression of fatigue. The lack of decline in the IEMG in the VL despite the decline in power output over the course of the WG suggests a peripheral as opposed to a neural mechanism of fatigue in this muscle. The significant difference in the pre vs. post percent decline in the GA IEMG score further supports this notion. The pre vs. post decline in the IEMG noted in the GA may suggest a fatigue-triggered change in pedaling mechanics that may promote dominance of knee extensors with less reliance on plantar flexors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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