↓ Skip to main content

Effects of two pre-workout supplements on concentric and eccentric force production during lower body resistance exercise in males and females: a counterbalanced, double-blind, placebo-controlled…

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 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
220 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 two pre-workout supplements on concentric and eccentric force production during lower body resistance exercise in males and females: a counterbalanced, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
DOI 10.1186/s12970-017-0203-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grant M. Tinsley, Matthew A. Hamm, Amy K. Hurtado, Austin G. Cross, Jose G. Pineda, Austin Y. Martin, Victor A. Uribe, Ty B. Palmer

Abstract

Pre-workout supplements purportedly enhance feelings of energy, reduce fatigue and improve exercise performance. The purpose of this study was to examine the performance effects of caffeinated and non-caffeinated multi-ingredient pre-workout supplements. In a counterbalanced, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, eccentric and concentric force production during lower body resistance exercise on a mechanized squat device were assessed after supplement ingestion. Repetitions-in-reserve/RPE and subjective feelings of energy, focus and fatigue were also examined. Twenty-one resistance-trained adults (12 F, 9 M) completed three conditions in random order: caffeinated supplement, non-caffeinated supplement and placebo. Subjects were not informed of the presence of a placebo condition. Thirty minutes after supplement ingestion, a 3-repetition maximum test and 5 sets of 6 repetitions were completed using the squat device. Each repetition involved 4-s eccentric and concentric phases, and the force signal throughout each repetition was sampled from a load cell contained within the squat device. The scaled and filtered force signals were analyzed using customized software. Repeated measures analysis of variance and appropriate follow-up analyses were utilized to compare dependent variables, and relevant effect sizes (d) were calculated. Supplement or placebo ingestion led to similar subjective responses (p > 0.05). Energy (+8 to 44%; d = 0.3 to 0.8) and focus (+8 to 25%; d = 0.3 to 0.5) were acutely increased by supplement or placebo ingestion and decreased as the exercise session progressed. Fatigue was acutely decreased by supplement or placebo ingestion (-7 to 38%; d = -0.1 to -0.6) and increased as the exercise session progressed. Eccentric and concentric forces were unimproved by supplementation during the exercise sets for both sexes. In the non-caffeinated supplement condition only, maximal eccentric force production was lower during sets 3 to 5, as compared to set 1 (p < 0.05). Effect size data indicated that both the caffeinated and non-caffeinated supplements may contribute to small increases in concentric force production in males (+5 to 20%, d = 0.2 to 0.4 relative to placebo), but not females. As compared to placebo, caffeinated and non-caffeinated multi-ingredient pre-workout supplements failed to improve concentric and eccentric force production. In males, effect size data indicate a possible small benefit of supplementation on concentric force production, although this was not statistically significant. When resistance-trained subjects were unaware of the presence of a placebo, resistance exercise performance was similar regardless of whether a placebo or multi-ingredient supplement was ingested.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 220 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 49 22%
Student > Master 33 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 6%
Student > Postgraduate 10 5%
Lecturer 7 3%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 78 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 70 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 86 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,196,902
of 25,653,515 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#274
of 950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,847
of 449,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#255
of 852 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,653,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 64.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 449,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 852 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.