Repeated Application of a Novel Creatine Cream Improves Muscular Peak and Average Power in Male Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whinton, AK, Donahoe, K, Gao, R, Thompson, KMA, Aubry, R, Saunders, TJ, Johnston, A, Chilibeck, PD, and Burr, JF. Repeated application of a novel creatine cream improves muscular peak and average power in male subjects. J Strength Cond Res 34(9): 2482-2491, 2020-Using a multicenter, randomized controlled trial, (N = 123, age 23 ± 4 years) we sought to determine whether administration of a novel, topical creatine supplement could improve muscular performance after acute and repeated (7-day) exposure. To study the acute performance enhancing effects of the supplement, subjects completed 5 sets of 15 maximal concentric single-leg knee extensions with and without the application of a low- (low dose [LD]-3.5 ml) or high-dose (high dose [HD]-7 ml) topical creatine cream. After a wash-out period, subjects had one leg randomized to receive either the creatine or placebo cream, with further randomization into an oral creatine or placebo supplement group. Subjects completed 5 sets of 15 maximal concentric single leg knee extensions before and after the supplementation protocol. After acute application, no significant differences in peak power (LD: 252 ± 93 W, HD: 261 ± 100 W, p = 0.21), average power (LD: 172 ± 65 W, HD: 177 ± 69 W, p = 0.78), or fatigue index (LD: 13.4 ± 10.6%, HD: 14 ± 11.9%, p = 0.79) were observed between experimental and placebo creams (peak power: LD: 244 ± 76 W, HD: 267 ± 109 W; average power: LD: 168 ± 57 W, HD: 177 ± 67 W; fatigue index: LD: 12.4 ± 9.6%, HD: 12.8 ± 10.6%) or when controlling for sex. After the 7-day supplementation protocol, a significant increase in average power (creatine: 203 ± 61-220 ± 65 W, placebo: 224 ± 61-214 ± 61 W) and peak power (creatine: 264 ± 73-281 ± 80 W, placebo: 286 ± 79-271 ± 73 W) in the leg receiving creatine cream was observed in male subjects. No differences were observed in female subjects. The topical creatine cream did not enhance measures of muscle performance after acute application, but was able to improve peak and average power in male subjects after 7 consecutive days of application.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".