MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372335827 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000003202

A 2-yr Randomized Controlled Trial on Creatine Supplementation during Exercise for Postmenopausal Bone Health

2023· article· en· W4372335827 on OpenAlexafffund
Philip D. Chilibeck, Darren G. Candow, Julianne J. Gordon, Whitney Duff, Riley Mason, Keely A. Shaw, Regina M. Taylor‐Gjevre, Bindu Nair, Gordon A. Zello

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCreatineRandomized controlled trialBone healthPhysical therapyMedicinePostmenopausal womenInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationOsteoporosisBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to examine the effects of 2 yr of creatine monohydrate supplementation and exercise on bone health in postmenopausal women. METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-seven postmenopausal women (mean age, 59 yr) were randomized to receive creatine (0.14 g·kg -1 ·d -1 ) or placebo during a resistance training (3 d·wk -1 ) and walking (6 d·wk -1 ) program for 2 yr. Our primary outcome was the femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), with lumbar spine BMD and proximal femur geometric properties as the secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, creatine supplementation had no effect on BMD of the femoral neck (creatine: 0.725 ± 0.110 to 0.712 ± 0.100 g·cm -2 ; placebo: 0.721 ± 0.102 to 0.706 ± 0.097 g·cm -2 ), total hip (creatine: 0.879 ± 0.118 to 0.872 ± 0.114 g·cm -2 ; placebo: 0.881 ± 0.111 to 0.873 ± 0.109 g·cm -2 ), or lumbar spine (creatine: 0.932 ± 0.133 to 0.925 ± 0.131 g·cm -2 ; placebo: 0.923 ± 0.145 to 0.915 ± 0.143 g·cm -2 ). Creatine significantly maintained section modulus (1.35 ± 0.29 to 1.34 ± 0.26 vs 1.34 ± 0.25 to 1.28 ± 0.23 cm 3 (placebo), P = 0.0011), predictive of bone bending strength, and buckling ratio (10.8 ± 2.6 to 11.1 ± 2.2 vs 11.0 ± 2.6 to 11.6 ± 2.7 (placebo), P = 0.011), predictive of reduced cortical bending under compressive loads, at the narrow part of the femoral neck. Creatine reduced walking time over 80 m (48.6 ± 5.6 to 47.1 ± 5.4 vs 48.3 ± 4.5 to 48.2 ± 4.9 s (placebo), P = 0.0008) but had no effect on muscular strength (i.e., one-repetition maximum) during bench press (32.1 ± 12.7 to 42.6 ± 14.1 vs 30.6 ± 10.9 to 41.4 ± 14 kg (placebo)) and hack squat (57.6 ± 21.6 to 84.4 ± 28.1 vs 56.6 ± 24.0 to 82.7 ± 25.0 kg (placebo)). In the subanalysis of valid completers, creatine increased lean tissue mass compared with placebo (40.8 ± 5.7 to 43.1 ± 5.9 vs 40.4 ± 5.3 to 42.0 ± 5.2 kg (placebo), P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Two years of creatine supplementation and exercise in postmenopausal women had no effect on BMD; yet, it improved some bone geometric properties at the proximal femur.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicMuscle metabolism and nutritionFrench-language works237,207