Creatine Monohydrate Supplementation, but not Creatyl-L-Leucine, Increased Muscle Creatine Content in Healthy Young Adults: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creatine (Cr) supplementation is a well-established strategy to enhance gains in strength, lean body mass, and power from a period of resistance training. However, the effectiveness of creatyl-L-leucine (CLL), a purported Cr amide, is unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the effects of CLL on muscle Cr content. Twenty-nine healthy men (n = 17) and women (n = 12) consumed 5 g/day of either Cr monohydrate (n = 8; 28.5 ± 7.3 years, 172.1 ± 11.0 cm, 76.6 ± 10.7 kg), CLL (n = 11; 29.2 ± 9.3 years, 170.3 ± 10.5 cm, 71.9 ± 14.5 kg), or placebo (n = 10; 30.3 ± 6.9 years, 167.8 ± 9.9 cm, 69.9 ± 11.1 kg) for 14 days in a randomized, double-blind design. Participants completed three bouts of supervised resistance exercise per week. Muscle biopsies were collected before and after the intervention for quantification of muscle Cr. Cr monohydrate supplementation which significantly increased muscle Cr content with 14 days of supplementation. No changes in muscle Cr were observed for the placebo or CLL groups. Cr monohydrate supplementation is an effective strategy to augment muscle Cr content while CLL is not.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".