Evidence Hub

Effects of Creatine Supplementation on the Performance, Physiological Response, and Body Composition Among Swimmers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Dongxiang Huang, Xiao-Bing Wang, Tomohiro Gonjo, Hideki Takagi, Bo Huang, Wen-Rui Huang, Shan Qi, D. Chow

Sports Medicine - Open, 2024

361 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Although recent studies have increasingly focused on examining the potential benefits of creatine supplementation to improve performance in swimming events, the impact of creatine supplementation on swimming performance remains a topic of debate and controversy. A comprehensive meta-analytical review was undertaken to evaluate the effects of creatine supplementation on the performance, physiological response, and body composition among swimmers. The research methodology adhered strictly to the guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A comprehensive search was conducted across six databases (Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and SPORTDiscus) until March 23, 2024. Eligible studies that investigated the impact of creatine supplementation on swimming time, physiological parameters, and body composition in swimmers were included. For the meta-analysis, a random-effects model was employed to determine the collective effect and assess variations across distinct subgroups defined by swimming time, physiological metrics, and body composition. Meta-regression analysis was conducted on datasets comprising ten or more studies. Standardized mean differences (SMD) along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. To evaluate the methodological rigor of the included studies, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was utilized. The systematic review included…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 361 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free