ReviewMetabolites2026
Metabolomics for Athlete Monitoring: An Evidence-Readiness Framework for Contextual Validation.
Review in Metabolites, 2026. 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
Abstract
Metabolomics can place the metabolic consequences of training, competition, recovery, nutrition, and environmental exposure in a physiological context. However, an exercise-responsive metabolite should not be regarded as decision-ready on the basis of a pre-post association alone, because interpretation depends on the biological matrix, sampling time, analytical performance, athlete characteristics, and intended monitoring question. This structured narrative review examines the requirements for translating metabolomic findings into athlete monitoring. English-language, peer-reviewed studies were identified through structured searches of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from 1 January 2020 through 31 July 2026. We distinguish source-evidence directness from validation maturity, which comprises discovery, analytical validation with independent replication, within-athlete longitudinal validation, and implementation testing against prespecified sport-relevant outcomes. We consider pathway-level interpretation of signals related to substrate use, recovery, and physiological stress, together with the metadata, repeated sampling, analytical quality control, and comparative testing required to establish value beyond established monitoring measures. Wearable biochemical sensing, continuous glucose monitoring, artificial intelligence, and multi-omics approaches may provide contextual information, but require analyte-specific calibration, transparent modeling, external validation, and demonstrated practical value. Metabolomics should therefore function as an explanatory layer in multimodal athlete monitoring while individual panels are evaluated in clearly defined sport and decision contexts.
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.