↓ Skip to main content

Determinants of Food Choice in Athletes: A Systematic Scoping Review

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine - Open, June 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Determinants of Food Choice in Athletes: A Systematic Scoping Review
Published in
Sports Medicine - Open, June 2022
DOI 10.1186/s40798-022-00461-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fiona E. Pelly, Rachael L. Thurecht, Gary Slater

Abstract

The individual determinants of food choice have been extensively investigated in the general population, but there have been limited studies in athletes. A better understanding of the food making decisions can help to target interventions that lead to optimal intake for athletes' health and performance. A scoping review will provide an understanding of the sports and settings that have been investigated, the methods and approaches to assessing food choice, as well as the factors influencing food choice. The objective of this review was to map the available evidence on the multi-faceted determinants of food choice in athletes and describe key influences impacting their choices. Athletes 16 years and over from any country who engage in physical activity with the intent to be competitive. Studies were included if they reported the multi-faceted determinants of food choice as either a primary or secondary outcome. All study designs were considered. This review followed the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. Eleven databases including PubMed, Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), SPORTDiscus (EBSCO), PsycNET (APA), Health Collection (Informit), CINAHL (EBSCO), the Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Trove (National Library of Australia), JBI (Ovid), and Google scholar were searched between September-November 2020 and updated in March 2021. Charting of Data Search results were screened with selected studies extracted into a summary table established a priori by the authors. Study quality was assessed using standardised reporting tools for qualitative and quantitative research designs. The scope and quality of evidence was summarised and reported. A total of 15 studies were included. Qualitative research included one research thesis and six primary research studies using both focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative research included one research thesis and seven primary research studies with cross-sectional design using different validated and non-validated survey instruments. No longitudinal or intervention studies were found. The majority of studies have been published since 2018 and conducted across multiple countries with either mixed cohorts of athletes or focused on predominately endurance or team sports. The quality of reporting was variable, particularly for qualitative research. Outcomes suggested that performance and health were relevant to athlete food choice, with varying impact of competition season, the level of experience, the culture of the sport, the cultural background or nationality of the athlete, athlete sex and the food environment. More research is needed on the multi-faceted determinants of food choice in different cohorts of athletes, particularly females. Future research could explore the relationship between food choice, nutrition knowledge and diet quality or the change in food choice across the phase of the seasons and through injury and illness. Use of validated measurement tools and robust reporting will enable critical interpretation of the study methods and outcomes for use in practice. Registration OSF Registries: Open-ended registration 25th Sept 2020 https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/4PX2A.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Unspecified 4 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 3 4%
Student > Master 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 44 63%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Unspecified 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 44 63%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,709,234
of 25,019,915 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine - Open
#310
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,125
of 436,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine - Open
#19
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,019,915 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 436,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.