Effects of Acute Modafinil Ingestion on Exercise Time to Exhaustion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of acute ingestion of modafinil (M) on time to exhaustion during high-intensity exercise. Modafinil (M) is a psychostimulant developed to treat narcolepsy, with "arousal" properties attributed to an increased release of dopamine in the CNS. Because other stimulants with similar properties have ergogenic effects, it was hypothesized that acute treatment with M would enhance physical performance. METHODS: Fifteen healthy male subjects, with a maximal aerobic power (VO2max) of 47 +/- SD 8 mL x kg x min, exercised on a cycle ergometer for 5 min at 50% VO2max and then at approximately 85% VO2max to exhaustion. They did this weekly for 3 wk: a control trial (C) the first week, and then 3 h after ingesting either placebo (P) or M (4 mg x kg) during the remaining 2 wk. The P and M trials were conducted with a balanced order, double-blind design. RESULTS: : Mean +/- SD times to exhaustion at 85% VO2max (TE) were 14.3 +/- 2.8, 15.6 +/- 3.8 and 18.3 +/- 3.5 min for the C, P, and M trials, respectively. TE for M was significantly longer than for the C and P trials. Oxygen uptake at exhaustion was slightly but significantly greater for M compared with P and C. HR increased with time and was further elevated by M. Subjective ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were significantly lower for M compared with C and P but only after 10 min of exercise at 85% VO2max. CONCLUSION: Acute ingestion of modafinil prolonged exercise time to exhaustion at 85% VO2max and reduced RPE. The RPE results suggest that the dampening of the sensation of fatigue was likely a factor responsible for the enhanced performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".