Study record

Mitochondrial-derived peptides in energy metabolism

Merry TL, Chan A, Woodhead JST et al. · Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab · 2020

ReviewSeveralEvidence tier R
PubMed 32776825doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00249.2020Full text (PMC)Compare with another study

What this study reported

Reviewed evidence that circulating mitochondrial-derived peptides, including MOTS-c, are lower in obesity, diabetes and ageing, while muscle expression rises with stressors such as exercise. Also summarised rodent studies in which administered MOTS-c was reported to enhance insulin sensitivity.

Limitations

Narrative review without systematic search; mixes human association data with rodent administration studies, and MOTS-c is covered alongside seven other peptides.

Study record

Annotated fields for this study
Study modelReview
Substance studiedSeveralMore than one of these is central to the paper (common for reviews).
SpeciesNot reported
System studiedNarrative review of mitochondrial-derived peptides in energy metabolism across human and rodent studies
PopulationNot reported
DesignNarrative review
Sample size as reportedNot reported
Control groupNot reported
Route (data field only)Not reported
Endpoints measuredcirculating MDP levels; insulin sensitivity; muscle MDP expression
Pathways measuredInsulin & glucose handling · AMPK signalling
Research areasMetabolic · Aging · Exercise · Mitochondrial biology
Evidence tierR — Review (context, not evidence)
Publication typesJournal Article, Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review

Appraisal

Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.

Relevance to MOTS-c
Direct
Model applicability
n/a
Sample size
n/a
Controls
n/a
Outcome validity
n/a
Support for its own conclusion
Moderate

Provenance

  • Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
  • Annotated from the published abstract.
  • Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
  • Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.