ReviewJSAMS plus2025
Exploring different interventions for Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (REDs): A systematic review.
Review in JSAMS plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objectives and design: Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (REDs) is caused by an imbalance in energy intake and expenditure through exercise, which leads to low energy availability. Although awareness of REDs is improving, a synthesis into the available literature to determine the efficacy of different interventions in athletes with REDs is needed. Subsequently, this may inform clinicians and athletes of the most appropriate interventions. Methods: Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched using keywords and their combinations. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved studies by title, abstract and full text. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was used to assess risk of bias. Data were extracted into an excel spreadsheet and a narrative synthesis performed. Results: The search retrieved 982 papers, and after screening, 11 were eligible for inclusion, including increase in energy intake (n = 3), increase in energy intake and decrease in energy expenditure (n = 1), dietary approaches (n = 1), education and counselling (n = 5) and hormonal intervention (n = 1). Increasing energy intake enabled return of menses, yet did not significantly increase bone mineral density. Dietary approaches significantly improved body image, tension, vigour and depression. Nutrition education improved bone health, energy availability, and eating behaviours in athletes, while hormonal interventions had limited effects on bone mineral density. Conclusion: Increasing energy intake is essential in the management of REDs and may be more effective when used alongside education and hormonal treatment. Future research is needed to allow better analysis of the efficacy of interventions due to the limited research available.
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.