Hostname: page-component-7857688df4-74lm6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-14T02:32:35.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Accepted manuscript

Creatine supplementation for treating symptoms of depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2025

Igor Eckert*
Affiliation:
Independent Scholar, Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Júlia Lima
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Andressa Amaral Dariva
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Coletiva, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
*
Corresponding author details: Igor Eckert, E-mail address: igoreckert2@gmail.com. Postal address: Jeronymo Zelmanovitz, 100, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Zip-code: 91060-135.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Nutraceuticals are increasingly of interest in nutritional psychiatry, where creatine has been investigated in several randomised trials for its effects on depressive symptoms. However, these findings have not yet been systematically synthesised. We conducted a systematic review to assess the effects of creatine supplementation on symptoms of depression. Four databases were searched up to February 2025 for trials comparing creatine with placebo in individuals with or without depression. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment (RoB 2) were conducted independently, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Random-effects meta-analyses with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment including 11 trials (1,093 participants) found a standardised mean difference (SMD) of -0.34 (95% CI, -0.70 to -0.00; GRADE: very low quality of evidence), equivalent to 2.2 points on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, below the minimal important difference of 3.0 points. Confidence intervals include non-clinically important effects and heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 71.3%). While effects appeared larger in clinically-depressed populations, subgroup analyses and trim-and-fill adjustments indicated substantial bias favouring creatine. Results for secondary endpoints were significant for remission (3 trials, OR 3.60, 95% CI 1.76 to 7.56), but not for treatment response (2 trials, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.88). Our findings suggest creatine may offer a small-to-moderate benefit for individuals with depression, but average effects were not clinically important and the true effect may be trivial or null. The evidence on which these results are based is very uncertain. Larger, more rigorous randomised trials are required to draw definitive conclusions.

Information

Type
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society