Carbohydrates and Endurance Exercise: A Narrative Review of a Food First Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbohydrate (CHO) supplements such as bars, gels, drinks and powders have become ubiquitous as effective evidence-based CHO sources that improve endurance exercise performance. However, athletes are increasingly turning to more cost-effective 'food-first' approaches for CHO ingestion to improve exercise performance. Mixed CHO foods including cooked lentils, oats, honey, raisins, rice, and potatoes are all effective pre-exercise CHO food sources. Caution is advised when selecting some of these foods as a primary CHO source, as some athletes may be prone to gastrointestinal discomfort-especially regarding those foods where the quantities required for recommended CHO intake may be voluminous (e.g., potatoes). Palatability may be another barrier to the ingestion of some of these CHO-rich foods. Although most of these CHO-rich foods appear effective for exercise performance or recovery when consumed pre- and post-exercise, not all are viable to ingest during exercise due to difficulties in the quantities required, transport, and/or gastrointestinal discomfort. Raisins, bananas and honey may be particularly useful CHO foods for consumption during exercise, as they are easily transportable. Athletes should trial CHO food sources before, during and/or following training before implementation during competition.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".