Skip to main content

Advertisement

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