Effects of acute sleep deprivation and caffeine supplementation on anaerobic performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Athletes involved in team sports may be subject to varying degrees of sleep deprivation either before or after training and competition. Despite the belief among athletes and coaches of the importance of adequate sleep for ensuing performance, the effect of sleep loss on team-sport anaerobic performance remains unclear. There is conflicting evidence in the scientific literature as to the impact of acute sleep deprivation and caffeine supplementation on anaerobic performance indices. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of 24 hours of acute sleep deprivation on anaerobic performance and the effect of caffeine supplementation on anaerobic performance in the sleep deprived state. METHODS: 11 club level games players (n=11, 25±4 yr, 178±7.5 cm, 80.2±10.4 kg, 15.1±5.6% body fat) participated in a repeated measures double-blinded placebo control trial. Following familiarisation, each participant returned for testing on three separate occasions. One of the testing sessions took place following a night of normal sleep and the other two sessions took place following 24 hours of sleep deprivation with supplementation of either placebo or 6 mg.kg- 1 of caffeine. During each testing session participants performed the vertical jump height, 20-m straight sprint, Illinois speed agility test and 5-m shuttle run. RESULTS: No significant differences were detected comparing non sleep deprived and sleep deprived interventions in any of the assessed outcome measures. There were also no significant differences observed in any of the outcome measures when comparing caffeine and placebo data in the sleep deprived state. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of athletes, a 24-h period of acute sleep deprivation did not have any significant impact on anaerobic performance. Caffeine also did not have any effect of on anaerobic performance in the sleep-deprived state.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".