Background A sustained mismatch between energy intake and exercise energy expenditure (EEE) can lead to Low Energy Availability (LEA), health and performance impairments characteristic of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S). Questionnaires can conveniently identify symptoms and/or LEA/ RED-S risk factors. This study aimed to systematically identify, and critique questionnaires used or developed to measure LEA/ RED-S risk in athletic populations. Methods A systematic search was conducted using PubMed database. Full text articles were included if: (i) the questionnaire(s) in the study identified LEA and/or RED-S risk; (ii) studies developed questionnaires to identify LEA and/or RED-S risk; (iii) participants belonged to athletic population(s); and (iv) in English. Results Thirty-three articles met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed, 13 questionnaires were identified. Eight questionnaires had undergone validation procedures, and three questionnaires included questions related to EEE. The most widely used validated questionnaires were Low Energy Availability in Females Questionnaire (LEAF-Q) (48% articles) and Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) (12% articles). The LEAF-Q determines LEA risk from symptoms but cannot be used in males as nearly half of the items (n = 12) relate to menstrual function. The EDE-Q serves as a surrogate marker of LEA risk in both sexes, as it measures a major risk factor of LEA, disordered eating. Better validation is needed for many questionnaires and more are needed to address LEA/RED-S risk in male athletes. Conclusion These questionnaires may be effective in identifying intentional energy restriction but less valuable in identifying inadvertently failure to increase energy intake with increased EEE.

Dietary nitrate supplementation has shown promising ergogenic effects on endurance exercise. However, at present there is no systematic analysis evaluating the effects of acute or chronic nitrate supplementation on performance measures during high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT). The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the evidence for supplementation of dietary beetroot—a common source of nitrate—to improve peak and mean power output during HIIT and SIT. A systematic literature search was carried out following PRISMA guidelines and the PICOS framework within the following databases: PubMed, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and SPORTDiscus. Search terms used were: ((nitrate OR nitrite OR beetroot) AND (HIIT or high intensity or sprint interval or SIT) AND (performance)). A total of 17 studies were included and reviewed independently. Seven studies applied an acute supplementation strategy and ten studies applied chronic supplementation. The standardised mean difference for mean power output showed an overall trivial, non-significant effect in favour of placebo (Hedges’ g = −0.05, 95% CI −0.32 to 0.21, Z = 0.39, p = 0.69). The standardised mean difference for peak power output showed a trivial, non-significant effect in favour of the beetroot juice intervention (Hedges’ g = 0.08, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.30, Z = 0.72, p = 0.47). The present meta-analysis showed trivial statistical heterogeneity in power output, but the variation in the exercise protocols, nitrate dosage, type of beetroot products, supplementation strategy, and duration among studies restricted a firm conclusion of the effect of beetroot supplementation on HIIT performance. Our findings suggest that beetroot supplementation offers no significant improvement to peak or mean power output during HIIT or SIT. Future research could further examine the ergogenic potential by optimising the beetroot supplementation strategy in terms of dosage, timing, and type of beetroot product. The potential combined effect of other ingredients in the beetroot products should not be undermined. Finally, a chronic supplementation protocol with a higher beetroot dosage (>12.9 mmol/day for 6 days) is recommended for future HIIT and SIT study.

The aim of this review is to investigate the common wearable devices currently used in field hockey competitions, and to understand the hockey-specific parameters these devices measure. A systematic search was conducted by using three electronic databases and search terms that included field hockey, wearables, accelerometers, inertial sensors, global positioning system (GPS), heart rate monitors, load, performance analysis, player activity profiles, and competitions from the earliest record. The review included 39 studies that used wearable devices during competitions. GPS units were found to be the most common wearable in elite field hockey competitions, followed by heart rate monitors. Wearables in field hockey are mostly used to measure player activity profiles and physiological demands. Inconsistencies in sampling rates and performance bands make comparisons between studies challenging. Nonetheless, this review demonstrated that wearable devices are being used for various applications in field hockey. Researchers, engineers, coaches, and sport scientists can consider using GPS units of higher sampling rates, as well as including additional variables such as skin temperatures and injury associations, to provide a more thorough evaluation of players’ physical and physiological performances. Future work should include goalkeepers and non-elite players who are less studied in the current literature.

No abstract

Objectives: This study investigated the prevalence of potential Low Energy Availability (LEA) risk amongst amateur and recreational athletes in Singapore. Design: In this cross-sectional study, a 52-item online questionnaire was used to determine potential LEA risk in the participants. A mean score of ≥4.0 on any of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) subscale, and/or a global score of ≥4.0, and/or Body Mass Index (BMI) <18.5 kg/m 2 were primary measures of potential LEA risk. Other LEA risk correlates included Hooper's Questionnaire, perceptions on body composition and performance, athlete type (amateur or recreational), type of sport (individual or team), and if they trained with or without a coach. Participants: 318 participants from Singapore, aged 21-35 years old (124 males; 194 females) completed the study questionnaire. Results: 34.3% of participants were found to be at potential risk of LEA. Female athletes (44.3%) had a significantly higher (p < 0.001) potential LEA risk than males (18.5%). However, the potential LEA risk between athlete type, type of sport, those who trained with or without a coach were not significantly different (p > 0.316). Conclusions and Implications:The study found more than one third of the participants being at potential LEA risk. The findings add to the body of evidence on identifying athletes with potential LEA risk. Future studies can investigate the LEA prevalence amongst athletes in Singapore and other Asian populations with more extensive questionnaires that address consequences and symptoms of LEA.