Branched-Chain Amino Acids Supplementation and Post-Exercise Recovery: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This overview of systematic reviews (OoSRs) aimed, firstly, to systematically review, summarize, and appraise the findings of published systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses that investigate the effects of branched-chain amino acids (BCAA) on post-exercise recovery of muscle damage biomarkers, muscle soreness, and muscle performance. The secondary objective was to re-analyze and standardize the results of meta-analyses using the random-effects Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) method.Methods: The methodological quality of the reviews was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2.We searched on five databases (i.e., PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, ProQuest) for systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses that investigated the effects of BCAA supplementation on the post-exercise recovery of muscle damage biomarkers, muscle soreness, and muscle performance.Results: Eleven systematic reviews (seven with meta-analyses) of individual studies were included. Evidence suggests BCAA ingestion attenuates creatine kinase (CK) levels (medium effects) and muscle soreness (small effects) immediately post-exercise and accelerates their recovery process, with trivial-to-large effects for CK levels and small-to-large effects for muscle soreness. BCAA supplementation has no effect on lactate dehydrogenase, myoglobin, and muscle performance recovery. The re-analyses with HKSJ method using the original data reported a slight change in results significance, concluding the same evidence as the original results. The major flaws found in the analyzed reviews were the absence of justification for excluding studies, and the lack of provision of sources of funding for primary studies and sources of conflict of interest and/or funding description.Conclusions: BCAA supplementation is an effective method to reduce post-exercise muscle damage biomarkers, particularly CK levels, and muscle soreness, with no effect on muscle performance. Future systematic reviews with/without meta-analyses, with greater methodological rigor, are needed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".