Improvement after a supplement is not the same as a comparative result
Start with the comparison. A before-and-after change alone cannot isolate the contribution of an ingredient.
Beetroot Extract
Selected research topic
Cognition
Some measured outcomes improved in human comparison studies. Read these findings with their populations and conditions.
- Publications for this topic
- 2
- Human comparison publications
- 1
- Publications needing review
- 1
Findings in the studies
Reaction time of response to the cognitive tasks
- A better result than the comparison group was reported.General population · Day seven of supplementation
Measurement and study conditions
- Study type
- Randomized controlled trial: subjects were randomly assigned to groups for comparison.
- Study population
- Human participants · General population
- Ingredients tested
- Unknown intervention
- How results were compared
- Results were compared between groups. · Study comparison: Nitrate-rich beetroot juice versus nitrate-depleted beetroot juice during intermittent sprint testin
- Additional measurement information
- Primary outcome
- Measurement time
- Day seven of supplementation
This result is held for interpretation. That does not mean research found no effect.
Outcome groups needing additional review (1)
- cognitive function · Distinct papers needing additional review: 1Evidence criteria check: 1
One paper can appear under multiple measured outcomes or review reasons, so these counts should not be added together.
Representative outcome and study details
Human studies reported between-group improvement in Reaction time of response to the cognitive tasks.
Scope not specified · Human studies · between-group comparison
1 publications linked to this result
- Route, form, dose, or population details are incomplete, so the findings cannot be confirmed as directly comparable.
Data coverage and detailed study classifications
Paper counts are separated by research topic below. One paper may contribute to multiple findings.
Analysis status: Public-ready
Ingredient analysis date:
How the grade was determined: B
The 66.2 evidence score includes 12 independent human studies and 10 clinical studies in the representative benefit area. The B tier reflects evidence directness, repetition, and consistency together.
The grade is based mainly on the research area with the most evidence. It does not mean the same result was found in other areas.
Papers linked to this ingredient overall: 80
Papers linked to this topic 2 · distinct papers 2 · papers with a confirmed human comparison 1 · papers needing additional review 1
A publication may appear in more than one count. These numbers should not be added. Ingredient-wide papers, topic-linked papers, and sources in outcome groups use different scopes. Adding source counts may count the same paper more than once.
- cognitive function: Sources represented in this measurement group: 1 · Distinct papers with human comparisons for this outcome: 0
- Reaction time of response to the cognitive tasks: Sources represented in this measurement group: 1 · Distinct papers with human comparisons for this outcome: 1
What the research found
Reaction time of response to the cognitive tasks
The study reported improvement in this measurement.
Controlled study in people · Unknown intervention · General population
Between-group comparison
Analysis coverage and paper counts
1 paper · 1 measured outcome
Direction counts are distinct papers within each row. Outcome contributions count endpoint results, so one paper may contribute more than once.
cognitive function
The study needs further checking before its result can be interpreted.
Controlled study in people · Ingredient combination · Patient group
Several ingredients were used together. This does not establish the effect of this ingredient alone or synergy.
Between-group comparison
Analysis coverage and paper counts
1 paper · 1 measured outcome
1 papers held from direction counts
Direction counts are distinct papers within each row. Outcome contributions count endpoint results, so one paper may contribute more than once.
How to read research findings
How should I read research findings?
Research guidesNo clear difference and an uninterpretable result are different
A reported null comparison contains a result. An abstract without an interpretable comparison leaves a question unresolved.
Paper counts and study counts are different
Count original research separately from research that reanalyzes it. Publication volume is neither replication nor a quality rating.
Side effects and combination findings
Findings from this ingredient alone are shown separately from those involving another supplement or medication.
No combination cautions are available to show in the current data. This does not guarantee safety.
Review 1 combination findings and 0 findings that outperformed an ingredient alone.
Reported improvements with combinations
Combination findings are grouped by how the study compared them. This is not a recommendation to combine ingredients.
Combinations with reported improvement
The combination showed improvement, but each ingredient's contribution is unclear.
CaffeineIn a randomized crossover trial of 20 healthy males, the combination of caffeine and beetroot juice significantly improved 1,000-m running performance compared to placebo (p < 0.01).