MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400060205 · doi:10.3390/nu16132022

Caffeine Boosts Weight-Lifting Performance in Rats: A Pilot Study

2024· article· en· W4400060205 on OpenAlexafffund
Emanuel Pereira-Alves, Julia Machado-Pereira, A. R. M. MONTEIRO, Roberto Costa-Cordeiro, Vinod Chandran, Igor Jurišica, Eduardo Seixas Prado, Luiz Cláudio Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoDiscovery CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersUniversidade Federal do Estado do Rio de JaneiroFinanciadora de Estudos e ProjetosCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCanada Foundation for InnovationInstituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Teranóstica e NanobiotecnologiaBank of CanadaInternational Business Machines CorporationWaters Corporation
KeywordsCaffeineMedicineWeight liftingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caffeine is a well-described ergogenic aid used to enhance athletic performance. Using animal models can greatly increase our understanding of caffeine’s mechanisms in performance. Here, we adapted an animal weight-lifting exercise model to demonstrate caffeine’s ergogenic effect in rats. Male Wistar rats (315 ± 35 g) were randomly divided into two groups: one group received 5 mg·kg−1 of caffeine (0.5 mL; CEx; n = 5) and the other 0.9% NaCl (0.5 mL; PEx; n = 4) through an orogastric probe (gavage) one hour before exercise. Weight-lifting exercise sessions were performed over three subsequent days, and the number of complete squats performed was counted. Analyses of the area under the curve in all three experiments showed that the CEx group responded more to stimuli, performing more squats (1.7-, 2.0-, and 1.6-fold; p < 0.05) than the control group did. These three days’ data were analyzed to better understand the cumulative effect of this exercise, and a hyperbolic curve was fitted to these data. Data fitting from the caffeine-supplemented group, CEx, also showed larger Smax and Kd (2.3-fold and 1.6-fold, respectively) than the PEx group did. Our study demonstrated an acute ergogenic effect of caffeine in an animal weight-lifting exercise model for the first time, suggesting potential avenues for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207