Tier 2 — strong

Effects of chronic betaine supplementation on exercise performance: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Emilia Zawieja, Steven Machek, Nelo Eidy Zanchi, Jason Cholewa, Małgorzata Woźniewicz
Journal of sports sciences 2024 42(22):2131-2144

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 39514262
Funding
Funding was not specified in the indexed record or accessible funding metadata.
Competing interests
A competing-interest declaration was not available in the indexed record or accessible disclosure metadata.

Study snapshot

DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of trials
ModelEvidence synthesis; mixed research models
Sample17 studies; 317 participants, 21% female
InterventionChronic betaine versus placebo
DurationAt least 7 days; search and analysis published in 2024
EndpointsStrength; Power; Muscular endurance

What the study showed, in plain terms

Published in 2024, this source examined safety assessments and evidence synthesis. Its evidence base was 17 studies; 317 participants, 21% female. It evaluated Chronic betaine versus placebo across At least 7 days; search and analysis published in 2024.

Pooled maximal strength favored betaine, especially lower-body strength. Endurance and several power outcomes did not clearly improve; jump findings depended on sensitivity analysis.

Small studies, varying protocols and wide confidence intervals. Several publications can share participant cohorts.

Continue with TMG Data Center

Continue with Betaine Anhydrous Pre-Workout: Performance, Dose and Evidence

Key findings

  • Pooled maximal strength favored betaine, especially lower-body strength.
  • Endurance and several power outcomes did not clearly improve; jump findings depended on sensitivity analysis.
  • The recorded outcome domains were Strength; Power; Muscular endurance.

What this study can and cannot tell us

  • Small studies, varying protocols and wide confidence intervals. Several publications can share participant cohorts.
  • The conclusions inherit the limitations of the underlying studies. A narrative interpretation or guideline recommendation is not a new randomized treatment comparison.
  • Source basis: Indexed abstract and bibliographic data. Missing method details, funding information or participant denominators are not inferred.

Citation network

Articles citing this research paper

2 articles

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

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Biohack Blueprint research team

Last verified