Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Energy and exercise

Panax ginsengand Endurance Performance (Time to Exhaustion)

Only one source here so far, and it found no clear difference in endurance Performance (Time to Exhaustion).

How sure anyone can be

Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

Any estimate here is very uncertain.

The numbers reported

One source’s range, drawn against its own line of no difference and scaled to its own numbers.

-0.29-0.01 standardised effect size0.27

This range crosses the no-difference line, so these numbers fit a real difference and no difference at all equally well.

Bar the confidence interval — the range the true effect is likely to sit inNotch the number the source reportedLine where there would be no difference at all

One source, 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, 2016 · 8 studies pooled

    Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

    Efficacy of Ginseng Supplements on Fatigue and Physical Performance: a Meta-analysis.

    J Korean Med Sci. 2016;31(12):1879-1886. doi:10.3346/jkms.2016.31.12.1879. PMID:27822924.

    Number reported
    -0.01 standardised effect size
    Which way it went
    No clear difference
    Likely range
    -0.29 to 0.27
    Source’s own words
    standardized mean difference in physical performance vs placebo (not significant)
    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, 3 steps down: risk of bias, indirectness 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. Indirectness brought it down to Lowthe outcome measured is a proxy for the target outcomeReported in the abstract
    4. Imprecision brought it down to Very lowthe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
    5. Ends at Very low3 steps down.
    Inconsistency
    No high disagreement reported between the 8 studies it pooled

    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 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 Panax ginseng

Seven of the 16 things on our list for Panax ginseng have no reading here yet:

  • Common cold duration
  • Common cold incidence
  • Estimated VO2max
  • Hemoglobin A1c
  • HOMA-IR
  • Quality of Life Score
  • Triglycerides

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.