SynthesisJournal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition2026
Effects of nutritional interventions on competitive performance and dose‒response relationships among esports players of different skill levels: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exercise interventions and multidimensional cognitive function in esports players: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesEsports place exceptional demands on neuropsychological capacities; however, a systematic and quantitative synthesis of the specific efficacy of nutritional interventions across various tasks and competitive populations remains absent. This study aims to evaluate the impact of nutritional supplementation on cognitive function and competitive performance in esports players and to explore key moderating variables.
methodsElectronic databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus, were searched (up to January 25, 2026). Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. A three-level random-effects model was employed to calculate the pooled effect size (Hedges' g), with sources of heterogeneity explored through subgroup analyses and meta-regression.
resultsNutritional interventions significantly enhanced esports-related performance (g = 0.92), with the most pronounced benefits observed in processing speed (g = 1.18) and executive function (g = 1.06). Subgroup analyses revealed significant gains in both professional (g = 0.97) and amateur groups (g = 0.92), while the improvement in first-person shooter (FPS) games (g = 0.96) appeared to surpass that in multiplayer online battle athlete (MOBA) games. Meta-regression indicated no significant linear correlation between caffeine dosage and effect size. GRADE assessment categorized the quality of evidence mostly as "low" to "moderate."
conclusionsNutritional interventions demonstrate significant potential for optimizing multidimensional cognitive performance in esports players, particularly in enhancing fundamental reaction speed and high-level decision-making processes. While the findings exhibit a degree of robustness, their practical application should be cautiously evaluated within specific competitive contexts due to current limitations in evidence certainty and significant interstudy heterogeneity. Future research characterized by gender balance and mechanistic orientation with long-term intervention protocols is warranted to elevate the level of clinical evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.