Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40709812›Full record

ReviewPhysiological reports2025

Rigorous methodological approaches to address knowledge gaps in exercise, nutrition, immunity, and infection risk research.

G Davison, C Chidley, A W Jones

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Physiological reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

3 authors.

G DavisonSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4340-0074
C ChidleySchool of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Derby, Derby, UK.
A W JonesSchool of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

Enzymatica AB, SwedenG.D.-Volac Whey Nutrition limited, UKNeovite Colostrum UKNestec Research Centre, SwitzerlandSunChlorella Corp., Japan
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) and the associated symptoms can have significant impacts for the general population and athletes (e.g., affecting training, recovery, and performance). Various factors influence the risk of URTI, including physiological stress (i.e., exercise), psychological stress, sleep, travel, nutrition, and pathogen exposure. Traditional research in exercise immunology has relied heavily on ex vivo immune markers, which lack clinical relevance and overlook immune redundancy and robustness. As such, it is unsurprising that interventions affecting these markers do not always align with URTI risk. More recently, evidence has emphasized the importance of in vivo immune markers and clinical outcomes to assess infection risk, and the role of interventions to mitigate this. Traditionally, nutritional exercise immunology research has focused only on mechanisms affecting URTI via immune modulation. However, nutritional interventions may also act via immune-independent mechanisms (e.g., direct antipathogenic mechanisms). For future research, we recommend prioritizing clinically relevant endpoints (validated URTI logs; pathogen screening); using in vivo markers representing the integrated immune response; large sample size; and implementing stringent study controls. Experimental infection challenge models offer controlled investigations of interventions. These approaches will enhance our ability to determine the impact of exercise and nutrition on immunity and URTI outcomes in athletes.

Indexed as

ExerciseNutritional StatusRespiratory Tract InfectionsAnimalsHumansImmunityclinically relevantexerciseimmuneinfectionin vivonutritionURTI

Identifiers

PMID40709812
PMCPMC12290944

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.