Creatine monohydrate use is prospectively associated with muscle dysmorphia symptomatology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the prospective association between creatine monohydrate use and muscle dysmorphia symptomatology among adolescents and young adults in Canada. Data from 912 adolescents and young adults from the Canadian Study of Adolescent Health Behaviors were analyzed. Creatine monohydrate use in the past 12 months was assessed at Wave 1, and muscle dysmorphia symptomatology was measured using the Muscle Dysmorphic Disorder Inventory (MDDI) at Wave 1 and Wave 2. The prospective associations between creatine monohydrate use and the MDDI total score and subscale scores were determined using linear regression analyses. Regression analyses controlled for relevant demographic identifiers, prior substance use, and the corresponding Wave 1 MDDI variable. Creatine monohydrate use at Wave 1 was prospectively associated with both total muscle dysmorphia symptomatology (B 1.34, 95 % CI 0.27, 2.42) and greater Appearance Intolerance (B 0.52, 95 % CI 0.02, 1.03) at Wave 2. Importantly, these findings were independent of prior muscle dysmorphia symptomatology, lifetime anabolic-androgenic steroid use, lifetime cigarette use, and frequency of alcohol use. Creatine monohydrate is commonly used among adolescents and young adults. Findings from this study are among the first to document that creatine monohydrate use may be a risk factor for the development of muscle dysmorphia symptomatology among adolescents and young adults. Health and mental health care professionals may consider assessing for both creatine monohydrate use and muscle dysmorphia symptomatology among adolescents and young adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".