MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161112603 · doi:10.1123/ijspp.6.4.525

Effect of Creatine Supplementation Jumping Performance in Elite Volleyball Players

2011· article· en· W2161112603 on OpenAlexaffabout
Martin Lamontagne-Lacasse, Raymond Nadon, De Bernardi E

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJumpingSprintVertical jumpJumpCreatinePlaceboRepeated measures designMedicineMathematicsSeries (stratigraphy)Physical therapyPsychologyInternal medicineStatisticsPhysicsBiologyPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jump height is a critical aspect of volleyball players' blocking and attacking performance. Although previous studies demonstrated that creatine monohydrate supplementation (CrMS) improves jumping performance, none have yet evaluated its effect among volleyball players with proficient jumping skills. We examined the effect of 4 wk of CrMS on 1 RM spike jump (SJ) and repeated block jump (BJ) performance among 12 elite males of the Sherbrooke University volleyball team. Using a parallel, randomized, double-blind protocol, participants were supplemented with a placebo or creatine solution for 28 d, at a dose of 20 g/d in days 1-4, 10 g/d on days 5-6, and 5 g/d on days 7-28. Pre- and postsupplementation, subjects performed the 1 RM SJ test, followed by the repeated BJ test (10 series of 10 BJs; 3 s interval between jumps; 2 min recovery between series). Due to injuries (N = 2) and outlier data (N = 2), results are reported for eight subjects. Following supplementation, both groups improved SJ and repeated BJ performance. The change in performance during the 1 RM SJ test and over the first two repeated BJ series was unclear between groups. For series 3-6 and 7-10, respectively, CrMS further improved repeated BJ performance by 2.8% (likely beneficial change) and 1.9% (possibly beneficial change), compared with the placebo. Percent repeated BJ decline in performance across the 10 series did not differ between groups pre- and postsupplementation. In conclusion, CrMS likely improved repeated BJ height capability without influencing the magnitude of muscular fatigue in these elite, university-level volleyball 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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Physiology and PerformanceSame topicMuscle metabolism and nutritionFrench-language works237,207