Nov 26, 2024
Effects of caffeine supplements on performance of martial athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Polina Rybakova1,
- Alexander Miroshnikov1,
- Aleksandr Meshtel1,
- Alexey Antonov1
- 1Russian university of sports "GTSOLIFK"
Protocol Citation: Polina Rybakova, Alexander Miroshnikov, Aleksandr Meshtel, Alexey Antonov 2024. Effects of caffeine supplements on performance of martial athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.5jyl8dmd8g2w/v1
License: This is an open access protocol distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it's working
Created: November 12, 2024
Last Modified: November 26, 2024
Protocol Integer ID: 111952
Keywords: caffeine, ergogenic aids, dietary supplements, martial arts, performance
Disclaimer
Funding sources/sponsors: None
Conflicts of interest: None
Abstract
Background. Caffeine (1,3,7-trimethylxanthine) is the most widely consumed psychoactive substance in the world, with approximately 80% of the world's population consuming caffeine daily. Caffeine is also one of the most widely consumed performance-enhancing substances, due to its well-known ergogenic effects. An umbrella review of systematic reviews by Grgic et al. found that caffeine supplementation improves physical performance across a wide range of tasks, including endurance, muscular strength, and anaerobic power. The purpose of the study is to conduct a systematic search and generalization of randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of caffeine dietary supplements on performance variables of martial artists.
Methods. A systematic search of randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, Elibrary databases was conducted in accordance with PRISMA, the methodological quality will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A meta-analysis will be performed using random effects models.
Expected results. The review is expected to include 16 RCTs.
Guidelines
The study will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. The study protocol will be written before the search begins and will not be changed during or after the search.
Inclusion criteria were based on the PICOS system.
Search strategy:
| A | B | |
| PubMed | "caffeine"[MeSH Terms] AND "martial arts"[MeSH Terms] AND "athletic performance"[MeSH Terms] | |
| Cochrane Library | caffeine in Title Abstract Keyword AND martial arts in Title Abstract Keyword | |
| Epistemonikos | (title:(caffeine) OR abstract:(caffeine)) AND (title:(combat sports) OR abstract:(combat sports)) | |
| Еlibrary | кофеин, кофе, единоборства, работоспособность, эргогенная помощь |
Safety warnings
This systematic review could potentially include RCTs authored by one/more than one of the review authors.
Original language title
Original language title
In Russian: Влияние биологически активных добавок кофеина на работоспособность единоборцев: систематический обзор и мета-анализ
Anticipated or actual start date
Anticipated or actual start date
13.11.2024
Anticipated completion date
Anticipated completion date
12.12.2024
Stage of review at time of this registration
Stage of review at time of this registration
Pilot screening completed
Named contact email
Named contact email
rybakova.poly@gmail.com / rybakova.poly@yandex.ru
Named contact address
Named contact address
Moscow, Sovetskoy Armii Street, 6, 127018
Named contact phone number
Named contact phone number
897779381**
Organisational affiliation of the review
Organisational affiliation of the review
Center for Sports Innovative Technologies and Training of National Teams of the Moscow City Sports Department
The Russian University os sports "GTSOLIFK"
PICOS
PICOS
P – Healthy, qualified male combat athletes, aged 18 years and older; I – Intake of caffeine supplements; C – Intake of placebo; O – Tests assessing performance indicators; S – Randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Exclusion criteria: concomitant intake of caffeine with other dietary supplements; intake of anabolic androgenic steroids; experimental doses of caffeine were consumed by participants from food products (coffee, energy drinks, chewing gum, etc.); studies conducted during/after religious fasting
Review question
Review question
Effects of caffeine supplementation on performance of martial artists
Risk of bias (quality) assessment
Risk of bias (quality) assessment
Cochrane risk of bias tool 2. In parallel and independently by two authors
Searches
Searches
The literature search was carried out according to PRESS (Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies) in the databases (without restrictions on the date and language of publication): PubMed, Epistemonikos and Еlibrary.
Study selection. Initially, two review authors (PD Rybakova and AG Antonov) independently and in parallel screened article titles, abstracts, and, where appropriate, full texts from database records according to the eligibility criteria. Duplicates and articles that did not meet the criteria were excluded from the search. Any discrepancies were resolved by consensus discussion, and any disagreements were resolved by another reviewer (AB Miroshnikov).
Study extraction. Following the search, two review authors (PD Rybakova and AG Antonov) independently and in parallel screened the full texts according to the inclusion criteria. Duplicates and articles that did not meet the criteria were removed. Whenever disagreements arose between the assessments of the two researchers, consensus was reached either by discussion or with the help of a third reviewer (AB Miroshnikov). Inter-rater (kappa) agreement ranged from 0.53 (weak) to 1.00 (almost perfect), as recommended by McHugh.
If the article was not publicly available, we contacted the authors and waited for a response within 14 days.
Data recording tool - Microsoft Excel
Strategy for data synthesis
Strategy for data synthesis
The meta-analysis will be conducted using Cochrane's Review Manager software (version 5.4, UK) using standardized mean differences (SMD) as summary statistics for continuous data. The effects of caffeine supplementation on performance indicators will be estimated as 95% confidence intervals (CI) and weighted mean differences (WMD) for summary changes in study outcomes from baseline to endpoints in the experimental and control groups. The random effects model [DerSimonian] will be used for the analysis. Heterogeneity among RCTs will be assessed using the I² statistical method and the Cochrane Q-test. I² values of 25–50%, < 25%, 50–75% and > 75% will be considered as moderate, low, high and very high heterogeneity between RCTs, respectively. Subgroup sensitivity analysis will be used to identify potential sources of heterogeneity among included RCTs.
Protocol references
European Food Safety Authority. Caffeine; [(accessed on 11 January 2021)]. EFSA Explains Risk Assessment. Available online: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/pub/efsaexplainscaffeine150527
Grgic J, Grgic I, Pickering C, Schoenfeld BJ, Bishop DJ, Pedisic Z. Wake up and smell the coffee: caffeine supplementation and exercise performance-an umbrella review of 21 published meta-analyses. Br J Sports Med. 2020 Jun;54(11):681-688. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-100278.
James LP, Haff GG, Kelly VG, Beckman EM. Towards a Determination of the Physiological Characteristics Distinguishing Successful Mixed Martial Arts Athletes: A Systematic Review of Combat Sport Literature. Sports Med. 2016 Oct;46(10):1525-51. doi: 10.1007/s40279-016-0493-1.
Franchini E. Energy System Contributions during Olympic Combat Sports: A Narrative Review. Metabolites. 2023 Feb 17;13(2):297. doi: 10.3390/metabo13020297.
Delleli S, Ouergui I, Messaoudi H, Trabelsi K, Ammar A, Glenn JM, Chtourou H. Acute Effects of Caffeine Supplementation on Physical Performance, Physiological Responses, Perceived Exertion, and Technical-Tactical Skills in Combat Sports: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients. 2022 Jul 21;14(14):2996. doi: 10.3390/nu14142996.
Dickson K, Yeung CA. PRISMA 2020 updated guideline // Br Dent J. 2022. №232(11). P. 760-761. doi: 10.1038/s41415-022-4359-7.
Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA; PRISMA-P Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015 Jan 2;350: g7647. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7647.
Benzies KM, Premji S, Hayden KA, Serrett K. State-of-the-evidence reviews: advantages and challenges of including grey literature. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2006;3(2):55-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6787.2006.00051. x.
Amir-Behghadami M., Janati A. Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate eligibility criteria in systematic reviews // Emerg Med J. 2020. №37(6). P. 387. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2020-209567.
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986 Sep;7(3):177-88. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–560