Randomised trial2023
Chilibeck et al., 2023
No added bone-density or measured strength benefit; selected bone-geometry measures and walking time favoured creatine.
- Who
- 237 postmenopausal women, mean age 59, randomised
- Dose
- 0.14 g/kg/day
- Duration
- 2 years
- Limits
- Both groups exercised. Lean-mass benefit appeared in a valid-completers subanalysis. Secondary bone geometry findings are not proof of fewer fractures.
Read the published paper ↗ (opens in a new tab) Systematic review2020
de Guingand et al., 2020
The review found no serious adverse events attributed to creatine in the included female studies.
- Who
- 951 female participants across 29 studies monitoring adverse outcomes
- Dose
- Varied across studies
- Duration
- Varied across studies
- Limits
- Safety reporting was inconsistent. This is not a guarantee for every person, dose or medical situation.
Read the published paper ↗ (opens in a new tab) Randomised trial2025
Lak et al., 2025
No significant difference in hair outcomes or DHT between creatine and placebo.
- Who
- Resistance-trained men aged 18 to 40; 38 completers, 37 with hair assessments
- Dose
- 5 g/day
- Duration
- 12 weeks
- Limits
- Men only, small sample and 12 weeks. This does not establish long-term effects in women.
Read the published paper ↗ (opens in a new tab) Meta-analysis2026
Postmenopausal meta-analysis, 2026
Small lean-mass and leg-press strength benefits were found overall; bone density was unchanged.
- Who
- 608 women randomised in seven trials; lean mass pooled 338 women, leg-press strength 111
- Dose
- Varied; benefits were seen in trials using at least 5 g/day with resistance training
- Duration
- 12 to 104 weeks
- Limits
- Mostly some risk-of-bias concerns; not prospectively registered. Dose and training varied together. Lean mass includes water, and its prediction interval included no effect.
Read the published paper ↗ (opens in a new tab)