Cited by 375Coffee research and impactsSports Performance and TrainingMuscle metabolism and nutrition

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Wake up and smell the coffee: caffeine supplementation and exercise performance—an umbrella review of 21 published meta-analyses

Open access
Grgic, Jozo, Grgic, Ivana, Pickering, Craig, Schoenfeld, Brad J, Bishop, David J, Pedisic, Zeljko·2020·British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review, summarise and appraise findings of published meta-analyses that examined the effects of caffeine on exercise performance. Design: Umbrella review. Data sources: Twelve databases. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Meta-analyses that examined the effects of caffeine ingestion on exercise performance. Results: Eleven reviews (with a total of 21 meta-analyses) were included, all being of moderate or high methodological quality (assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 checklist). In the meta-analyses, caffeine was ergogenic for aerobic endurance, muscle strength, muscle endurance, power, jumping performance and exercise speed. However, not all analyses provided a definite direction for the effect of caffeine when considering the 95% prediction interval. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria the quality of evidence was generally categorised as moderate (with some low to very low quality of evidence). Most individual studies included in the published meta-analyses were conducted among young men. Summary/conclusion: Synthesis of the currently available meta-analyses suggest that caffeine ingestion improves exercise performance in a broad range of exercise tasks. Ergogenic effects of caffeine on muscle endurance, muscle strength, anaerobic power and aerobic endurance were substantiated by moderate quality of evidence coming from moderate-to-high quality systematic reviews. For other outcomes, we found moderate quality reviews that presented evidence of very low or low quality. It seems that the magnitude of the effect of caffeine is generally greater for aerobic as compared with anaerobic exercise. More primary studies should be conducted among women, middle-aged and older adults to improve the generalisability of these findings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bjsports-2018-100278

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 64 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 375

Metadata

Authors
Grgic, J., Grgic, I., Pickering, C., Schoenfeld, B. J., Bishop, D. J., & Pedisic, Z.
Affiliations
  • University of Lancashire (GB)
  • Lehman College (US)
  • Edith Cowan University (AU)
Venue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2019-03-29
Volume
54
Issue
11
Pages
681-688
ISSN
  • 0306-3674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-0480
OpenAlex
W2930495386
Cited by
375
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 27
FWCI
5.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CLOK (University of Central Lancashire) (acceptedVersion)
  • Victoria University Research Repository (Victoria University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Australasian Journal of Paramedicine (submittedVersion)
  • The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
Keywords
caffeine supplementation, exercise performance, ergogenic aids, cardiorespiratory fitness, muscle strength, muscular endurance, anaerobic power, jump performance, exercise speed, prediction intervals, quality of evidence
MeSH terms
Caffeine, Coffee, Female, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Exercise, Muscle, Skeletal, Dietary Supplements, Muscle Strength, Athletic Performance, 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