ArticleClinical nutrition research2024
5A's Behavior Change Model Improves Nutrition Knowledge and Intake Among Adolescent Athletes.
Article in Clinical nutrition research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The impact of the 5A nursing model on pain in patients with postherpetic neuralgia: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared the effects of 12 weeks of intensive nutrition education (IE) using the 5A's behavioral change model and basic nutrition education (BE) on nutritional knowledge and nutrient intake among Korean adolescent athletes. This study included elite adolescent athletes (IE group: n = 65, BE group: n = 65) at a physical education high school in Seoul. In this prospective, randomized, controlled trial, the athletes' body composition, nutritional knowledge, nutrient intake, and self-management practices were evaluated at the beginning and end of the intervention. Both groups had increased levels of nutrition knowledge between pre- and post-test, but the change in total score for nutrition knowledge was significantly higher in the IE group than in the BE group (p < 0.001). Energy intake post-test increased significantly in the IE group (from 2,185 to 2,651 kcal/day, p < 0.001) but not in the BE group. The intake of carbohydrates, protein, and fat also increased significantly in the IE group (carbohydrates: from 298 to 352 g/day, protein: from 86 to 106 g/day, fat: from 71 to 88 g/day, all p < 0.001), but the change in the BE group was not significant. Additionally, the IE group showed a significant overall increase in vitamins and minerals compared to the BE group at post-test. Adolescent athletes in the IE group showed improved nutritional knowledge and intake compared to those in the BE group 12 weeks after the intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.