Cited by 18Sports Performance and TrainingMuscle metabolism and nutritionCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Effects of sodium bicarbonate ingestion on measures of wingate test performance: A meta-analysis

Open access
Grgic, Jozo·2022·Journal of the American Nutrition Association

Abstract

The review aimed to perform a meta-analysis of studies exploring the acute effects of sodium bicarbonate on Wingate test performance. Ten databases were searched to find studies that examined the effects of sodium bicarbonate on single and repeated Wingate tests. Meta-analyses were performed using the random-effects model. Ten studies were included in the review. There was no significant difference between the sodium bicarbonate and placebo trials for mean power in Wingate test 1 (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.07, 0.11) and test 3 (SMD = 0.21; 95% CI: -0.16, 0.58). There was a significant effect of sodium bicarbonate on mean power in Wingate test 2 (SMD = 0.09; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.16), and test 4 (SMD = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.15, 1.08). When considering studies that used shorter rest intervals between repeated Wingate tests, a significant effect of sodium bicarbonate was found on mean power in Wingate test 3 (SMD = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.80). There was no significant difference between the sodium bicarbonate and placebo trials for peak power in Wingate test 1 (SMD = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.06, 0.04), test 2 (SMD = 0.02; 95% CI: -0.10, 0.13), or test 4 (SMD = 0.29; 95% CI: -0.13, 0.71). There was a significant effect of sodium bicarbonate on peak power in test 3 (SMD = 0.09; 95% CI: 0.00, 0.17). The results of this review suggest that sodium bicarbonate may provide an ergogenic effect on measures of repeated Wingate test performance.Key Teaching Poi…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07315724.2020.1850370

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grgic, J.
Affiliations
Institute for Health and Sport (IHES), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia
Venue
Journal of the American Nutrition Association
Published
2020-12-14
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 2769-7061 (ISSN-L)
  • 2769-707X
OpenAlex
W3113164905
Cited by
18
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of the American Nutrition Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Victoria University Research Repository (Victoria University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
sodium bicarbonate, ergogenic aids, Wingate test, repeated sprint performance, peak power, average power, high-intensity exercise, acute supplementation, rest interval duration, placebo comparison, anaerobic capacity
MeSH terms
Eating, Exercise, Sodium Bicarbonate, Performance-Enhancing Substances

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review