Hypothesis-Generating Brief: Creatine monohydrate — full paper

Researka accepted publication: 20c54f16-9fa0-483f-a812-d305b4b1d813 Source submission: 7bff8453-a2c4-40a0-b1f6-deb5803d948d This paper synthesizes evidence on Creatine monohydrate across 28 accepted source papers and 1882 high-confidence extracted claims. The evidence profile contains 4 direct clinical sources, 23 adjacent clinical sources, and 1 mechanistic or model-system source, with a high-density pairwise disagreement map across the evidence base. Positive study-level signals are summarized in the muscle function and contextual adjacent evidence outcome classes, null signals in the muscle function, contextual adjacent evidence and cardiometabolic outcome classes, and negative signals in the contextual adjacent evidence and muscle function outcome classes. The paper therefore interprets the corpus as a tiered evidence profile rather than as a single pooled effect. The conclusion is that Creatine monohydrate remains a bounded geroscience case: the retained clinical and mechanistic evidence profile defines the scope for targeted testing, while mixed and null findings limit any unqualified anti-aging claim. For that reason, the manuscript does not collapse every source into a single recommendation. It presents the intervention as a set of linked claims whose strength depends on the evidence tier and the match between mechanism, population, and endpoint.