女足运动员通过双重标记水的能量消耗、摄入和可用性:我们是否误解了低能量可用性?

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PHYSIOLOGY Experimental Physiology Pub Date : 2024-08-15 DOI:10.1113/EP091589
Samuel J McHaffie, Carl Langan-Evans, Juliette A Strauss, José L Areta, Christopher Rosimus, Martin Evans, Ruth Waghorn, James Grant, Matthew Cuthbert, Catherine Hambly, John R Speakman, James P Morton
{"title":"女足运动员通过双重标记水的能量消耗、摄入和可用性:我们是否误解了低能量可用性?","authors":"Samuel J McHaffie, Carl Langan-Evans, Juliette A Strauss, José L Areta, Christopher Rosimus, Martin Evans, Ruth Waghorn, James Grant, Matthew Cuthbert, Catherine Hambly, John R Speakman, James P Morton","doi":"10.1113/EP091589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Female soccer players have been identified as presenting with low energy availability (LEA), though the prevalence of LEA may be overestimated given inaccuracies associated with self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, we aimed to quantify total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) via the doubly labelled water (DLW) method, energy intake (EI) and energy availability (EA). Adolescent female soccer players (n = 45; 16 ± 1 years) completed a 9-10 day 'training camp' representing their national team. Absolute and relative TDEE was 2683 ± 324 and 60 ± 7 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> fat free mass (FFM), respectively. Mean daily EI was lower (P < 0.01) when players self-reported using the remote food photography method (RFPM) (2047 ± 383 kcal day<sup>-1</sup>) over a 3-day period versus DLW derived EI estimates accounting for body mass (BM) changes (2545 ± 518 kcal day<sup>-1</sup>) over 7-8 days, representing a mean daily Δ of 499 ± 526 kcal day<sup>-1</sup> and 22% error when using the RFPM. Estimated EA was different (P < 0.01) between methods (DLW: 48 ± 14 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> FFM, range: 22-82; RFPM: 37 ± 8 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> FFM, range: 22-54), such that prevalence of LEA (<30 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> FFM) was lower in DLW compared with RFPM (5% vs. 15%, respectively). Data demonstrate the potential to significantly underestimate EI when using self-report methods. This approach can therefore cause a misrepresentation and an over-prevalence of LEA, which is the underlying aetiology of 'relative energy deficiency in sport' (REDs). HIGHLIGHTS: What is the central question of this study? Do self-reported dietary intakes (via remote food photography method, RFPM) overestimate low energy availability (LEA) prevalence in female soccer players compared with energy intake evaluation from the doubly labelled water (DLW) method? What is the main finding and its importance? Estimated energy availability is greater with the DLW method compared with RFPM, such that the prevalence of LEA is greater when self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, data demonstrate the potential to misrepresent the prevalence of LEA, an underlying factor in the aetiology of 'relative energy deficiency in sport' (REDs).</p>","PeriodicalId":12092,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Physiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Energy expenditure, intake and availability in female soccer players via doubly labelled water: Are we misrepresenting low energy availability?\",\"authors\":\"Samuel J McHaffie, Carl Langan-Evans, Juliette A Strauss, José L Areta, Christopher Rosimus, Martin Evans, Ruth Waghorn, James Grant, Matthew Cuthbert, Catherine Hambly, John R Speakman, James P Morton\",\"doi\":\"10.1113/EP091589\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Female soccer players have been identified as presenting with low energy availability (LEA), though the prevalence of LEA may be overestimated given inaccuracies associated with self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, we aimed to quantify total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) via the doubly labelled water (DLW) method, energy intake (EI) and energy availability (EA). Adolescent female soccer players (n = 45; 16 ± 1 years) completed a 9-10 day 'training camp' representing their national team. Absolute and relative TDEE was 2683 ± 324 and 60 ± 7 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> fat free mass (FFM), respectively. Mean daily EI was lower (P < 0.01) when players self-reported using the remote food photography method (RFPM) (2047 ± 383 kcal day<sup>-1</sup>) over a 3-day period versus DLW derived EI estimates accounting for body mass (BM) changes (2545 ± 518 kcal day<sup>-1</sup>) over 7-8 days, representing a mean daily Δ of 499 ± 526 kcal day<sup>-1</sup> and 22% error when using the RFPM. Estimated EA was different (P < 0.01) between methods (DLW: 48 ± 14 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> FFM, range: 22-82; RFPM: 37 ± 8 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> FFM, range: 22-54), such that prevalence of LEA (<30 kcal kg<sup>-1</sup> FFM) was lower in DLW compared with RFPM (5% vs. 15%, respectively). Data demonstrate the potential to significantly underestimate EI when using self-report methods. This approach can therefore cause a misrepresentation and an over-prevalence of LEA, which is the underlying aetiology of 'relative energy deficiency in sport' (REDs). HIGHLIGHTS: What is the central question of this study? Do self-reported dietary intakes (via remote food photography method, RFPM) overestimate low energy availability (LEA) prevalence in female soccer players compared with energy intake evaluation from the doubly labelled water (DLW) method? What is the main finding and its importance? Estimated energy availability is greater with the DLW method compared with RFPM, such that the prevalence of LEA is greater when self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, data demonstrate the potential to misrepresent the prevalence of LEA, an underlying factor in the aetiology of 'relative energy deficiency in sport' (REDs).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental Physiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental Physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1113/EP091589\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1113/EP091589","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

女性足球运动员已被确定为低能量可用性(LEA)患者,但由于自我报告的膳食摄入量不准确,LEA的患病率可能被高估。因此,我们旨在通过双标记水(DLW)法量化每日总能量消耗(TDEE)、能量摄入(EI)和能量可用性(EA)。青少年女足球运动员(n = 45;16 ± 1 岁)代表国家队完成了为期 9-10 天的 "训练营"。绝对和相对 TDEE 分别为 2683 ± 324 千卡/千克和 60 ± 7 千卡/千克。3 天内的平均日 EI 低于 7-8 天内根据体重(BM)变化得出的 DLW EI 估计值(2545 ± 518 千卡/天-1)(P-1),即平均日 Δ 为 499 ± 526 千卡/天-1,使用 RFPM 时误差为 22%。估计的 EA 有所不同(P -1 FFM,范围:22-82;RFPM:37 ± 8 千卡 kg-1 FFM,范围:22-54),因此 DLW 的 LEA(-1 FFM)发生率低于 RFPM(分别为 5%和 15%)。数据表明,使用自我报告方法可能会大大低估 EI。因此,这种方法可能会造成 LEA 的误报和高发,而这正是 "运动中相对能量缺乏症"(REDs)的根本病因。重点:本研究的核心问题是什么?与通过双标水(DLW)法评估能量摄入量相比,自我报告的膳食摄入量(通过远程食物摄影法,RFPM)是否高估了女足运动员低能量可用性(LEA)的发生率?主要发现及其重要性是什么?与 RFPM 相比,DLW 法估计的能量可用性更高,因此在自我报告膳食摄入量时,LEA 的发生率更高。因此,数据表明 LEA 的患病率有可能被误报,而 LEA 是 "运动中相对能量缺乏"(REDs)病因的一个潜在因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Energy expenditure, intake and availability in female soccer players via doubly labelled water: Are we misrepresenting low energy availability?

Female soccer players have been identified as presenting with low energy availability (LEA), though the prevalence of LEA may be overestimated given inaccuracies associated with self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, we aimed to quantify total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) via the doubly labelled water (DLW) method, energy intake (EI) and energy availability (EA). Adolescent female soccer players (n = 45; 16 ± 1 years) completed a 9-10 day 'training camp' representing their national team. Absolute and relative TDEE was 2683 ± 324 and 60 ± 7 kcal kg-1 fat free mass (FFM), respectively. Mean daily EI was lower (P < 0.01) when players self-reported using the remote food photography method (RFPM) (2047 ± 383 kcal day-1) over a 3-day period versus DLW derived EI estimates accounting for body mass (BM) changes (2545 ± 518 kcal day-1) over 7-8 days, representing a mean daily Δ of 499 ± 526 kcal day-1 and 22% error when using the RFPM. Estimated EA was different (P < 0.01) between methods (DLW: 48 ± 14 kcal kg-1 FFM, range: 22-82; RFPM: 37 ± 8 kcal kg-1 FFM, range: 22-54), such that prevalence of LEA (<30 kcal kg-1 FFM) was lower in DLW compared with RFPM (5% vs. 15%, respectively). Data demonstrate the potential to significantly underestimate EI when using self-report methods. This approach can therefore cause a misrepresentation and an over-prevalence of LEA, which is the underlying aetiology of 'relative energy deficiency in sport' (REDs). HIGHLIGHTS: What is the central question of this study? Do self-reported dietary intakes (via remote food photography method, RFPM) overestimate low energy availability (LEA) prevalence in female soccer players compared with energy intake evaluation from the doubly labelled water (DLW) method? What is the main finding and its importance? Estimated energy availability is greater with the DLW method compared with RFPM, such that the prevalence of LEA is greater when self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, data demonstrate the potential to misrepresent the prevalence of LEA, an underlying factor in the aetiology of 'relative energy deficiency in sport' (REDs).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Experimental Physiology
Experimental Physiology 医学-生理学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
262
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Experimental Physiology publishes research papers that report novel insights into homeostatic and adaptive responses in health, as well as those that further our understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms in disease. We encourage papers that embrace the journal’s orientation of translation and integration, including studies of the adaptive responses to exercise, acute and chronic environmental stressors, growth and aging, and diseases where integrative homeostatic mechanisms play a key role in the response to and evolution of the disease process. Examples of such diseases include hypertension, heart failure, hypoxic lung disease, endocrine and neurological disorders. We are also keen to publish research that has a translational aspect or clinical application. Comparative physiology work that can be applied to aid the understanding human physiology is also encouraged. Manuscripts that report the use of bioinformatic, genomic, molecular, proteomic and cellular techniques to provide novel insights into integrative physiological and pathophysiological mechanisms are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Neural control of coronary artery blood flow by non-adrenergic and non-cholinergic mechanisms. Unpacking the multimodal, multi-scale data of the fast and slow lanes of the cardiac vagus through computational modelling. Selective efferent vagal stimulation in heart failure. Correction to 'Pulmonary diffusing capacity to nitric oxide and carbon monoxide during exercise and in the supine position: A test-retest reliability study'. CTRP6-mediated cardiac protection in heart failure via the AMPK/SIRT1/PGC-1α signalling pathway.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1