Tier 3 — preclinical

Creatine Supplementation for Cognition: A Critical Perspective on Promise, Proof, and Public Perception

Igor Eckert
J Nutr 2025 155(10):3143-3147

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 40744234
DOI
10.1016/j.tjnut.2025.07.016
Funding
No explicit funding statement was located in the accessible PubMed or publisher records during Biohack Blueprint's 2026-10-02 audit. This is an audit-status statement, not confirmation that the study received no funding.
Competing interests
No explicit competing-interests statement was located in the accessible PubMed or publisher records during Biohack Blueprint's 2026-10-02 audit. This is an audit-status statement, not confirmation that no competing interests existed.

Study snapshot

DesignCritical perspective
ModelHuman evidence appraisal
SampleNot applicable
InterventionCritical appraisal of creatine-cognition evidence and public claims
DurationNot applicable
EndpointsCognition evidence quality; Marketing claims; Bias; Public perception

What the study showed, in plain terms

Critical peer-reviewed perspective arguing that enthusiasm for creatine as a cognitive enhancer has moved faster than the certainty of the human evidence.

Key findings

The paper does not dismiss cognitive potential but emphasizes limited evidence, bias and the need to separate promising signals from claims that exceed what trials can support.

What this study can and cannot tell us

Perspective article rather than a systematic review or new experiment; useful for evidence framing but not for estimating an 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