↓ Skip to main content

Effects of ingesting a pre-workout dietary supplement with and without synephrine for 8 weeks on training adaptations in resistance-trained males

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
260 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of ingesting a pre-workout dietary supplement with and without synephrine for 8 weeks on training adaptations in resistance-trained males
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
DOI 10.1186/s12970-016-0158-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Y. Peter Jung, Conrad P. Earnest, Majid Koozehchian, Minye Cho, Nick Barringer, Dillon Walker, Christopher Rasmussen, Mike Greenwood, Peter S. Murano, Richard B. Kreider

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine whether ingesting a pre-workout dietary supplement (PWS) with and without synephrine (S) during training affects training responses in resistance-trained males. Resistance-trained males (N = 80) were randomly assigned to supplement their diet in a double-blind manner with either a flavored placebo (PLA); a PWS containing beta-alanine (3 g), creatine nitrate as a salt (2 g), arginine alpha-ketoglutarate (2 g), N-Acetyl-L-Tyrosine (300 mg), caffeine (284 mg), Mucuna pruiriens extract standardized for 15% L-Dopa (15 mg), Vitamin C as Ascorbic Acid (500 mg), niacin (60 mg), folate as folic acid (50 mg), and Vitamin B12 as Methylcobalamin (70 mg); or, the PWS supplement with Citrus aurantium extract containing 20 mg of synephrine (PWS + S) once per day for 8-weeks during training. Participants donated a fasting blood sample and had body composition (DXA), resting heart rate and blood pressure, cognitive function (Stroop Test), readiness to perform, bench and leg press 1 RM, and Wingate anaerobic capacity assessments determined a 0, 4, and 8-weeks of standardized training. Data were analyzed by MANOVA with repeated measures. Performance and cognitive function data were analyzed using baseline values as covariates as well as mean changes from baseline with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Blood chemistry data were also analyzed using Chi-square analysis. Although significant time effects were seen, no statistically significant overall MANOVA Wilks' Lambda interactions were observed among groups for body composition, resting heart and blood pressure, readiness to perform questions, 1RM strength, anaerobic sprint capacity, or blood chemistry panels. MANOVA univariate analysis and analysis of changes from baseline with 95% CI revealed some evidence that cognitive function and 1RM strength were increased to a greater degree in the PWS and/or PWS + S groups after 4- and/or 8-weeks compared to PLA responses. However, there was no evidence that PWS + S promoted greater overall training adaptations compared to the PWS group. Dietary supplementation of PWS and PWS + S did not increase the incidence of reported side effects or significantly affect the number of blood values above clinical norms compared to PLA. Results provide some evidence that 4-weeks of PWS and/or PWS + S supplementation can improve some indices of cognitive function and exercise performance during resistance-training without significant side effects in apparently health males. However, these effects were similar to PLA responses after 8-weeks of supplementation and inclusion of synephrine did not promote additive benefits. This trial (NCT02999581) was retrospectively registered on December 16th 2016.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 260 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 14%
Student > Bachelor 36 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Researcher 17 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 92 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 45 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 7%
Unspecified 8 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Other 39 15%
Unknown 103 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2023.
All research outputs
#3,032,853
of 23,985,711 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#488
of 912 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,795
of 430,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#459
of 851 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,985,711 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 912 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 61.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 430,809 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 851 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.