2019
DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2019.1601261
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of acute caffeine ingestion on upper and lower body anaerobic exercise performance

Abstract: This document is the author's post-print version, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer-review process. Some differences between the published version and this version may remain and you are advised to consult the published version if you wish to cite from it.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
22
2
Order By: Relevance
“…During the Wingate test, cycling power was obtained with a frequency of 1 Hz and the peak and mean cycling power (in W/kg) obtained during the test were recorded as previously described . In addition, peak and minimum cycling power were used to calculate the Wingate fatigue index (%) as previously suggested . One minute after the end of the test, a blood sample was obtained from a fingertip to analyse blood lactate concentration (Lactate Pro 2, Arkay, Japan, in mmol/L).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…During the Wingate test, cycling power was obtained with a frequency of 1 Hz and the peak and mean cycling power (in W/kg) obtained during the test were recorded as previously described . In addition, peak and minimum cycling power were used to calculate the Wingate fatigue index (%) as previously suggested . One minute after the end of the test, a blood sample was obtained from a fingertip to analyse blood lactate concentration (Lactate Pro 2, Arkay, Japan, in mmol/L).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 In addition, peak and minimum cycling power were used to calculate the Wingate fatigue index (%) as previously suggested. 4 23 The criteria to interpret the magnitude of effect size were: ≤0.2 trivial, >0.2-0.6 small, >0.6-1.2 moderate, >1.2-2.0 large, >2.0 very large. 24 The results are presented as group average ± standard deviation.…”
Section: Experimental Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations