Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Energy and exercise

Creatineand Muscle strength (1-RM)

Both sources here measured higher muscle strength (1-RM).

How sure anyone can be

Low certainty, level 2 of 4

Further research is likely to change this.

The most certain of the two findings here; each record carries its own.

The numbers reported

1.43 kg
kg bench/chest press strength, weighted mean difference versus placebo, for creatine COMBINED WITH resistance training

One further source recorded only which way the numbers went, without a number.

None of these sources gave a likely range — the band the real answer probably sits in — so how precise these numbers are is still an open question here.

Two sources, newest first

What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A fixed rule worked this out from the source’s own fields. Nobody checked this rating by hand.

  • Systematic review, 2025 · 69 studies pooled

    Low certainty, level 2 of 4

    The Effects of Creatine Supplementation on Upper- and Lower-Body Strength and Power: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

    Nutrients. 2025;17(17). doi:10.3390/nu17172748. PMID:40944139.

    Number reported
    1.43 kg
    Which way it went
    Higher
    Likely range
    Not in the abstract
    Source’s own words
    kg bench/chest press strength, weighted mean difference versus placebo, for creatine COMBINED WITH resistance training
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    placebo
    Amount taken
    Not in the abstract
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe abstract reports no confidence interval for the estimateNot in the abstract
    4. Ends at Low2 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness
    Inconsistency
    No high disagreement reported between the 69 studies it pooled

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Systematic review, 2014

    Low certainty, level 2 of 4

    Creatine supplementation during resistance training in older adults-a meta-analysis.

    Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014;46(6):1194-203. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000000220. PMID:24576864.

    Number reported
    Not in the abstract
    Which way it went
    Higher
    Likely range
    Not in the abstract
    Source’s own words
    chest-press one-repetition maximum versus resistance training alone (magnitude not reported in abstract)
    Who was studied
    Older adult with resistance training
    Compared with
    resistance training plus placebo
    Amount taken
    Not in the abstract
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe abstract reports no confidence interval for the estimateNot in the abstract
    4. Ends at Low2 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness
    Inconsistency
    No disagreement reported, and no count of studies behind it

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI review could not confirm it — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and at least one check failed. The batch record names the check and quotes the sentence that caused the doubt. No person read it.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • One give no number at all, only which way it went.
  • Two give no likely range, so how precise those numbers are is unknown.
  • Two do not say how many people took part.
  • Amount taken — Not in the abstract.
  • For how long — Not in the abstract.

Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.

Still to read for Creatine

Five of the 14 things on our list for Creatine have no reading here yet:

  • Estimated VO2max
  • Heart rate variability (RMSSD)
  • Resting heart rate
  • Total sleep time
  • Total testosterone

Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.

Read next

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.