Study note • PMID 36920510
Carbohydrate mouth rinse is no more effective than placebo on running endurance of dehydrated and heat acclimated athletes.
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: controlled study.
- • Population relevance: athlete/trained context.
- • Consistency: single-study evidence.
- • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.
ELI5
In plain language
To determine whether carbohydrate mouth rinsing would improve endurance running performance of tropical natives in a warm-humid (30 degrees C and 70% relative humidity) environment. (controlled study; runners).
The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Performance in heat under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.
Takeaways
What the abstract suggests
- • Study question: To determine whether carbohydrate mouth rinsing would improve endurance running performance of tropical natives in a warm-humid (30 degrees C and 70% relative humidity) environment.
- • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Performance in heat under the tested conditions.
- • Population: runners.
- • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 3.6 min.
Protocol
Protocol (as reported)
- • Intervention/exposure: heat stress (vs placebo).
- • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 3.6 min.
- • Outcomes: Performance in heat.
- • 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 (runners) working on heat.
- • Athletes who can measure Performance in heat 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: controlled study (placebo-controlled).
- • Population: runners.
- • Comparator: placebo.
- • Outcomes measured: Performance in heat.
- • Protocol cues mentioned: 3.6 min.
- • Source: PubMed PMID 36920510 (2023) — European journal of applied physiology.
Results excerpt
What the abstract reports
“TTE performance was significantly longer in both CHO and PLA trials when compared with the CON trial (54.7 +/- 5.4 and 53.6 +/- 5.1 vs.”
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).
- • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
- • 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
Performance Science Lab
Research summaries for endurance athletes, with study context, practical protocols, and clear limitations.
Heat performance research
Heat changes pacing, hydration, and fueling — and it can be trained like altitude with fewer logistics.
Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol
Evidence-informed protocol: Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol. Practical steps, who it helps, and what to watch out for.