Skip to main content

Table 1 General characteristics of randomized controlled trials included in the systematic review

From: A systematic review and meta-analysis of carbohydrate benefits associated with randomized controlled competition-based performance trials

Reference

Type

Test

Mode

Test time

CHO content of pre-exercise meal (g/kg body weight)

Drink type during test

Drink during test per h

       

Fluid

CHO

Acker-Hewitt et al., 2012 [38]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

20 min + 44 min

1.3

8 % CHO not specified

0.7 L

56 g

Angus et al., 2000 [44]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

166 min

2.8

6 % CHO not specified

1.0 L

60 g

Beelen et al., 2009 [27]a

Mouth rinse

TT

Cycle

68 min

2.4

6.4 % MAL

0.0 L

0 g

Burke et al., 2000 [25]a

Carboloading

TT

Cycle

148 min

2

Both trials same 7 % GLUP

1.1 L

72 g

Burke et al., 2002 [26]a

Carboloading

S + TT

Cycle

120 + 25 min

2

Both trails same 6 % CHO, CHO not specified

0.7 L

44 g

Baur et al., 2014 [39]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

120 + 52 min

no data

a) 12 % GLU + FRU (2:1)

b) 8 % GLU

c) 12 % GLU

0.8 L

a) 93 g

b) 62 g

c) 93 g

Campbell et al., 2008 [34]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

a) 80 + 17 min

b) 80 + 17 min

c) 80 + 17 min

male: 1.4

female: 1.6

All 5.9 %

a) SUC + GLU + FRU drink

b) MAL + FRU gel

c) SUC + GLU sport beans

0.7 L

43 g

Clarke et al., 2011 [30]a

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Soccer

90 + 3 min

no data

6.6 % CHO not specified

0.9 L

59 g

Cox et al., 2008 [35]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

100 min + 30 min

2.1

10 % GLU

1.125 L

112.5 g

Cox et al., 2010 [36]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

100 min + 30 min

2.1

10 % GLU

1.125 L

112.5 g

Desbrow et al., 2004 [45]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

63 min

2

6 % CHO not specified

1.0 L

61 g

El-Sayed et al., 1995 [33]a

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

60 + 10 min

no data

7.5 % GLU

0.7 L

54 g

El-Sayed et al., 1997 [47]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

60 min

no data

8 % GLU

0.3 L

25 g

Flynn et al., 1989 [32]a

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

105 + 15 min

3.5

7.7 % GLUP & SUC

0.7 L

58 g

Ganio et al., 2010 [31]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

120 + 15 min

no data

6 % CHO not specified

0.9 L

53 g

Hulston et al., 2009 [37]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

120 + 59 min

no data

6 % GLU & FRU (2:1)

0.8 L

45 g

Hunter et al., 2002 [46]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

150 min

no data

7 % CHO not specified

0.6 L

42 g

Jeukendrup et al., 2008 [22]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

26 min

no data

6 % SUC & GLU (3:2)

1.2 L

70 g

Langenfeld et al., 1994 [40]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

241 min

no data

7 % MAL & FRU (5:2)

0.5 L

37 g

McGawley et al., 2012 [29]a

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Run

88 min + 40 min

no data

14.4 % MAL + FRU (2:1)

0.8 L

115 g

Mitchell et al., 1989 [13]

CHO vs. W

S + TT

Cycle

105 + 15 min

0.7

a) 6 % GLUP & SUC (2:1)

b) 12 % GLUP & FRU (2.4:1)

c) 18 % GLUP & FRU (4.1:1)

0.6 L

a) 37 g

b) 75 g

c) 111 g

Nassif et al., 2014 [41]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

135 min

no data

6 % CHO not specified

0.63 L

38 g

Rollo et al., 2010 [28]a

CHO vs. W

TT

Run

60 min

2.5

6.4 % CHO not specified

0.4 L

28 g

van Essen et al., 2006 [42]

CHO vs. W

TT

Cycle

135 min

no data

6 % SUC

1.0 L

60 g

  1. CHO carbohydrates, GLU glucose, GLUP glucose polymer, FRU fructose, MAL maltodextrin, SUC sucrose, S + TT submaximal exercise + time trial, TT time trial, W water
  2. anot suitable for meta-analyses