MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220991014 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v14n4p95

Dietary Recommendations for Active and Competitive Aerobic Exercising Athletes: A Review of Literature

2022· review· en· W4220991014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sylven Masoga, Gerald P. Mphafudi

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesAerobic exerciseScrutinySports nutritionMedicineAerobic capacityPhysical therapyMicronutrientPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerobic exercise is a common sport activity participated by numerous individuals in many parts of the world. Individuals involved in this sport may participate for various reasons, for instance, improved health and weight management while others are involved for competitive purposes. Recommendations, therefore, vary according to the aim and the intensity of the engagement. Depending on the purpose, dietary practices related to the type of foods or meals to be consumed, timing of intake and hydration strategies used by athletes remain important. There is a concern, however, that dietary recommendations for aerobic sport lack scrutiny. It is important for athletes involved in aerobic exercises to adhere to recommendations for them to enjoy their sports engagement while maintaining good health. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to discuss the aerobic exercise nutrition recommendations for aerobic exercising athletes with a specific focus on energy, macro- and micronutrients, nutrients dosing, and timing thereof.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicMuscle metabolism and nutrition→French-language works237,207→