Sport Nutrigenomics: Personalized Nutrition for Athletic Performance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An individual's dietary and supplement strategies can influence markedly their physical performance. Personalized nutrition in athletic populations aims to optimize health, body composition, and exercise performance by targeting dietary recommendations to an individual's genetic profile. Sport dietitians and nutritionists have long been adept at placing additional scrutiny on the one-size-fits-all general population dietary guidelines to accommodate various sporting populations. However, generic "one-size-fits-all" recommendations still remain. Genetic differences are known to impact absorption, metabolism, uptake, utilization and excretion of nutrients and food bioactives, which ultimately affects a number of metabolic pathways. Nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics are experimental approaches that use genomic information and genetic testing technologies to examine the role of individual genetic differences in modifying an athlete's response to nutrients and other food components. Although there have been few randomized, controlled trials examining the effects of genetic variation on performance in response to an ergogenic aid, there is a growing foundation of research linking gene-diet interactions on biomarkers of nutritional status, which impact exercise and sport performance. This foundation forms the basis from which the field of sport nutrigenomics continues to develop. We review the science of genetic modifiers of various dietary factors that impact an athlete's nutritional status, body composition and, ultimately athletic performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it