Statistical analyses The normality of data was assessed by Shapiro-Wilk’s test. Levene’s test was used to analyze the homogeneity of variances. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures was used for comparisons between conditions (CAF and PLA) and over time. The Bonferroni post hoc test was used when a significant F ratio was found for the main or interaction effect. A significance level of 5% was used

PFT�� mouse for all analyzes. Additionally, the practical inference based on magnitudes was also applied [22]. The chance of a given value to be beneficial (positive) or detrimental (negative) effect [e.g., higher or lower than the smallest worthwhile changes (0.20 Talazoparib solubility dmso multiplied by the initial standard deviation based on the effect size)] was calculated [23]. Thus, the change was assessed

qualitatively as follows: <1% almost certainly not; 1-5% very unlikely, 5-25% unlikely, 25-75% possible, 75-95% likely, 95-99% very likely and > 99% almost certainly yes. When the negative and positive values showed results greater than 10%, the inference was considered inconclusive. The effect size (Cohen’s d) was also calculated for the time trial performance and interpreted using the recommendations suggested by Hopkins et al. [22] as follows: 0 = Trivial; 0.2 = Small; 0.6 = Moderate; 1.2 = Large; 2.0 = Very large; 4.0 = Nearly perfect. Results Information on power, speed, pedaling cadence, HR and 20-km time trial test duration for PLA and CAF conditions are presented in Table 1. No significant differences were observed between CAF and PLA concerning GDC-0449 clinical trial Y-27632 2HCl HR and all the performance variables (P > 0.05). The results of the qualitative analysis proved inconclusive (unclear). The effect size was 0.06, being considered trivial. Power output and speed at every two kilometers in the 20-km time-trial, for CAF and PLA, are illustrated in Figure 1. Although a similar response

was observed among groups (P > 0.05), a significant distance main effect in the last two kilometers of the test was observed with increased power and speed (P < 0.001). However, no significant group main effect or group by moment interaction was identified (P > 0.05). Table 1 Cycling performance indicators during the 20-km time trials, after acute ingestion of CAF (n = 13) or PLA (n = 13). Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation Condition Variables PLA CAF P Power (watts) 206.9 ± 28.5 204.6 ± 43.9 0.79 Speed (km.h−1) 33.5 ± 1.8 33.3 ± 2.8 0.72 Cadence (rpm) 105.3 ± 8.4 103.4 ± 4.1 0.96 HR (beats.min−1) 171 ± 9.9 171 ± 8.0 0.94 Duration (s) 2191 ± 157.6 2181 ± 193.9 0.61 % difference (IC 90%) −10.1 (−45 to 24.9) % difference positive/trivial/negative 2/85/12 Qualitative Inference Unclear CAF = caffeine; PLA = placebo. Figure 1 Responses of power and speed on 20-km time-trial test under the conditions CAF (n = 13) and PLA (n = 13). *P < 0.05 vs. 20 km. Significant main effect of time (P < 0.001).