The Dose–Response Effect of Docosahexaenoic Acid on the Omega-3 Index in American Football Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: American-style football (ASF) players are at increased risk for head injuries and cardiovascular disease. n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids are cardioprotective, and emerging evidence suggests benefits for protection against head injuries. However, fundamental knowledge of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid dosing in athletes such as ASF players remains poorly understood. Therefore, this study investigated the dose-response effect of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation in red blood cells (RBC) and as the Omega-3 Index (O3I), in collegiate ASF players throughout a competitive season. METHODS: Sixty-nine ASF players were randomly assigned placebo (corn oil), or 2, 4, or 6 g·d -1 of DHA supplement. Blood samples were collected at eight time points (T1-T8) over 27 wk. RBC were extracted and analyzed by gas-liquid chromatography. Compliant players who had samples collected at all time points were analyzed. A repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to assess the dose-response effect of DHA over time, and between-group differences at individual time points were assessed by one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc test. RESULTS: A significant dose and time interaction was found, and all supplement groups had significantly greater DHA in RBC compared with placebo from T2-T8 ( P < 0.05). Athletes receiving 6 g·d -1 of DHA had the greatest O3I, relative to other groups, and the O3I reached steady state by 15 wk. The 6 g·d -1 group surpassed >8% on the O3I at approximately twice the rate of the 4 g·d -1 group (8 vs 15 wk). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide important fundamental knowledge demonstrating a dose-response incorporation of DHA into RBC membranes up to 6 g·d -1 . Furthermore, 6 g·d -1 of DHA can be used to rapidly achieve a desired O3I (>8%) in athletes in only 8 wk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".