“Heads Up” for Creatine Supplementation and its Potential Applications for Brain Health and Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is emerging interest regarding the potential beneficial effects of creatine supplementation on indices of brain health and function. Creatine supplementation can increase brain creatine stores, which may help explain some of the positive effects on measures of cognition and memory, especially in aging adults or during times of metabolic stress (i.e., sleep deprivation). Furthermore, creatine has shown promise for improving health outcome measures associated with muscular dystrophy, traumatic brain injury (including concussions in children), depression, and anxiety. However, whether any sex- or age-related differences exist in regard to creatine and indices of brain health and function is relatively unknown. The purpose of this narrative review is to: (1) provide an up-to-date summary and discussion of the current body of research focusing on creatine and indices of brain health and function and (2) discuss possible sex- and age-related differences in response to creatine supplementation on brain bioenergetics, measures of brain health and function, and neurological diseases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".