Cited by 1Sleep and Work-Related FatigueSleep and Wakefulness ResearchMuscle metabolism and nutrition

Single-Dose Creatine Reduces Sleep Deprivation-Induced Deterioration in Cognitive Performance

Open access
Gordji-Nejad, Ali, Matusch, Andreas, Hengstler, Lea, Beer, Simone, Kroll, Tina, Klein, Sabine, Elmenhorst, David, Bauer, Andreas +1 more·2026·Nutrients

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Creatine is a supplement that, beyond its physiological effects, has been shown to have positive effects on cognitive abilities. In our previous study, we showed that a single dose of 0.35 g/kg creatine induces changes in brain metabolism during sleep deprivation and reduces deterioration in cognitive performance. The present study investigates whether supplementation of a lower dose is associated with cognitive effects during sleep deprivation, focusing exclusively on cognitive performance outcomes. Methods: Twenty-nine healthy subjects performed cognitive tests at the evening baseline and 3, 5.5, and 7.5 h after receiving a single dose of creatine monohydrate (0.2 g/kg) or a placebo during a total of 21 h of sleep deprivation (SD). Results: The results show a mitigating effect of creatine on sleep deprivation-induced deterioration in logical and numerical tasks, language-related processing speed, and the Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT). Compared to males, females benefit more in logic, PVT and processing speed in language and logic tasks. Conclusions: Our results show that a dose of 0.2 g/kg creatine is associated with a reduced deterioration in cognitive performance during sleep deprivation. Although the effect is less pronounced than with a high dose of 0.35 g/kg, there is still an improvement of up to 12%.

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 · 10.3390/nu18081192

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [37]Toomim H.J. Brain Workshop—A Dual N-Back Game Version 4.8.4 Brain Workshop Dubai, United Arab Emirates 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gordji-Nejad, A., Matusch, A., Hengstler, L., Beer, S., Kroll, T., Klein, S., Elmenhorst, D., Bauer, A., & Drzezga, A.
Affiliations
Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
Corresponding author
Gordji-Nejad, Ali
Venue
Nutrients
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2026-04-10
Volume
18
Issue
8
Pages
1192
ISSN
2072-6643 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7153258317
Cited by
1
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
7.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nutrients (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Forschungszentrum Jülich
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
Keywords
creatine monohydrate, sleep deprivation, cognitive performance, processing speed, psychomotor vigilance test, sex differences, brain metabolism
MeSH terms
Processing Speed, Cognitive Enhancement, Adult, Cognition, Creatine, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Sleep Deprivation, Dietary Supplements, Young Adult

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