Tier 4 — mechanistic

Commentary: The effects of creatine supplementation on cognitive function in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Tom Citherlet
Front Nutr 2026 13:1716285

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 42039906
PubMed Central
PMC13105953
DOI
10.3389/fnut.2026.1716285
Funding
The author declared that financial support was not received for the work and/or its publication.
Competing interests
The author declared no commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Study snapshot

DesignMethodological commentary on a published systematic review and meta-analysis
ModelHuman evidence synthesis or trial
SampleCritique of Xu et al. 2024 (PMID 39070254)
InterventionNo new intervention; appraisal of meta-analytic handling of non-independent cognitive outcomes
DurationNot applicable
EndpointsUnit-of-analysis error; Double counting of non-independent outcomes; Meta-analysis methodology; Interpretation of pooled cognition effects

What the study showed, in plain terms

A 2026 methodological commentary arguing that the 2024 adult cognition meta-analysis may overstate precision because multiple correlated outcomes from individual studies were treated as independent effects.

Key findings

The commentary recommends re-analysis using multilevel methods or appropriately aggregated within-study outcomes before strong conclusions are drawn about the apparent cognitive benefit of creatine.

What this study can and cannot tell us

This is a commentary rather than an independent re-analysis with a corrected pooled effect estimate; it identifies a methodological concern but does not itself determine the true effect size.

Citation network

Articles citing this research paper

1 article

Biohack Blueprint analyses that reference this study in their evidence base.

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Biohack Blueprint research team

Last verified

Dr. Khaled Mahmoud, MBBChCritical Care Medicine, Longevity Science & Editorial Direction