Skip to content

Study note

Effects of caffeine chewing gum supplementation on exercise performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PMID 35239468 (2023): caffeine — Time-trial performance (study note for endurance athletes).

Updated Jul 22, 2026

Read the study note

Study note • PMID 35239468

Effects of caffeine chewing gum supplementation on exercise performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

European journal of sport science2023 • DOI 10.1080/17461391.2022.2049885

How to use this page

This note summarizes one study record. Check the participants, methods, results, and limitations before applying it to training.

  • Design signal: systematic review / meta-analysis.
  • Population relevance: athlete/trained context.
  • Consistency: synthesis evidence present.
  • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.

ELI5

In plain language

The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effect of caffeine gum (Caff-gum) on exercise performance-related outcomes. (systematic review / meta-analysis; n=200 trained athletes).

In this systematic review / meta-analysis, the abstract doesn’t find a clear benefit for Time-trial performance. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effect of caffeine gum (Caff-gum) on exercise performance-related outcomes.
  • In this systematic review / meta-analysis, the abstract doesn’t find a clear benefit for Time-trial performance.
  • Population: n=200 trained athletes.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 3 mg/kg • 4.26 mg/kg • 15 min • 120 min.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: caffeine.
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 3 mg/kg • 4.26 mg/kg • 15 min • 120 min.
  • Outcomes: Time-trial performance.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it may help, and who should be cautious

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (n=200 trained athletes) working on supplements.
  • Athletes who can measure Time-trial performance with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should be cautious

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: systematic review / meta-analysis (placebo-controlled).
  • Population: n=200 trained athletes.
  • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 3 mg/kg • 4.26 mg/kg • 15 min • 120 min.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 35239468 (2023) — European journal of sport science.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

There was a significant overall effect of Caff-gum compared to placebo (SMD = 0.21, 95%CI: 0.10-0.32; p = 0.001).

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations and bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Reviews and consensus statements mix protocols and populations; recommendations may not match your exact constraints.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Adaptive AI coach for iPhone

Meet your adaptive AI coach.

Tell your coach what you are training for. It builds the plan, follows the work you complete, and adapts upcoming training when recovery, your schedule, or real life changes.

Keep going

Sources