Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28332115›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2017

Periodized Nutrition for Athletes.

Asker E Jeukendrup

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 108 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
108citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

108 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. How Do Male Football Players Meet Dietary Recommendations? A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

48 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Asker E JeukendrupSchool of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK. a.e.jeukendrup@lboro.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is becoming increasingly clear that adaptations, initiated by exercise, can be amplified or reduced by nutrition. Various methods have been discussed to optimize training adaptations and some of these methods have been subject to extensive study. To date, most methods have focused on skeletal muscle, but it is important to note that training effects also include adaptations in other tissues (e.g., brain, vasculature), improvements in the absorptive capacity of the intestine, increases in tolerance to dehydration, and other effects that have received less attention in the literature. The purpose of this review is to define the concept of periodized nutrition (also referred to as nutritional training) and summarize the wide variety of methods available to athletes. The reader is referred to several other recent review articles that have discussed aspects of periodized nutrition in much more detail with primarily a focus on adaptations in the muscle. The purpose of this review is not to discuss the literature in great detail but to clearly define the concept and to give a complete overview of the methods available, with an emphasis on adaptations that are not in the muscle. Whilst there is good evidence for some methods, other proposed methods are mere theories that remain to be tested. 'Periodized nutrition' refers to the strategic combined use of exercise training and nutrition, or nutrition only, with the overall aim to obtain adaptations that support exercise performance. The term nutritional training is sometimes used to describe the same methods and these terms can be used interchangeably. In this review, an overview is given of some of the most common methods of periodized nutrition including 'training low' and 'training high', and training with low- and high-carbohydrate availability, respectively. 'Training low' in particular has received considerable attention and several variations of 'train low' have been proposed. 'Training-low' studies have generally shown beneficial effects in terms of signaling and transcription, but to date, few studies have been able to show any effects on performance. In addition to 'train low' and 'train high', methods have been developed to 'train the gut', train hypohydrated (to reduce the negative effects of dehydration), and train with various supplements that may increase the training adaptations longer term. Which of these methods should be used depends on the specific goals of the individual and there is no method (or diet) that will address all needs of an individual in all situations. Therefore, appropriate practical application lies in the optimal combination of different nutritional training methods. Some of these methods have already found their way into training practices of athletes, even though evidence for their efficacy is sometimes scarce at best. Many pragmatic questions remain unanswered and another goal of this review is to identify some of the remaining questions that may have great practical relevance and should be the focus of future research.

Indexed as

AthletesDietPhysical Education and TrainingAthletic PerformanceExerciseHumansMuscle, SkeletalNutritional Status

Identifiers

PMID28332115
PMCPMC5371625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.