ArticleJSAMS plus2025
The Athlete-IQ: Evaluating iron knowledge of female athletes and staff; with insights into practices among dietitians and iron experts.
Article in JSAMS plus, 2025. 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.
- Focus on female athletes and special issue on physical activity in people with disability.JSAMS plus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Iron deficiency (ID) is common in female athletes, with variable diagnostic criteria and supplementation protocols used to determine deficient athletes. Understanding iron rich food sources is fundamental to optimal nutrition intake. Purpose: Our aim was to characterise the iron knowledge of female athletes and affiliated staff and explore factors influencing iron deficiency practices among dietitians and iron experts (sports physiologists and iron researchers). Methods: A cross-sectional design was employed using a web-based iron questionnaire (adapted from previously validated questionnaires). Part One consisted of 16 items (11 iron questions) and was completed by female athletes and staff. Participants achieving a score >75 % (percentage of correct answers) were deemed to have adequate iron knowledge. Part Two consisted of 22 items (14 on iron deficiency practice) and was completed by dietitians and iron experts. Descriptive statistics were used for multiple choice questions and open responses were coded thematically. Results: Sixty-two participants (athletes n = 42; staff n = 20) across 10 sports completed Part One. Iron knowledge scores ranged from 21 % to 88 % among athletes (46 % ± 13 %) and staff (60 % ± 16 %). Twenty-eight practitioners (sports dietitians: n = 14; other professions: n = 14) across 28 sports completed Part Two. Between 10 % and 56 % of practitioners applied established criteria for diagnosing iron deficiency. Supplementation protocols varied between 20 and 100 mg/day or bi-daily of elemental iron for earlier stages of iron deficiency increasing to 60-200 mg/day or bi-daily for anaemic athletes. Conclusion: Iron knowledge is highly variable in female athletes and club staff. Teams and organisations should promote valid nutrition resources when access to a sports dietitian is not feasible. Practitioners may adopt heightened criteria to categorise iron deficiency but should adjust individual thresholds based on factors underpinning fluctuations in iron status.
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.