Evaluation of the Dietary Profile of Footballers in Ligue 2 in the Department of Brazzaville
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This exploratory study aimed to assess the dietary profile of 2nd division footballers in the departmental league of Brazzaville. Our sample was made up of 120 subjects divided into 3 clubs and aged on average 17.86 ± 1.39 years. Through the standardized and extended nutritional survey (SENS) and food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), we used the 24-hours recall method to assess nutritional status, respect for meal times, types of food consumed, quantity of food and variation of breakfast, lunch, snack and dinner foods. The results obtained showed that the nutritional status was normal at the level of the three (03) clubs (19.95 ± 2.12 kg/m2 for Gothia club, 21.60 ± 1.61 kg/m2 for Marakana club and 21.31 ± 1.88 kg/m2 for Red Star club. However, we first noted a lack of respect for meal times in 52.2% of Gothia players, 72.2% of Marakana players and 81.6% of Red Star players respectively. Similarly, dissatisfaction with competition meals was then noticed in 60.9%, 83.3% and 55.3% of Gothia, Marakana and Red Star players respectively. An insufficient number of meals taken during the day and no dietary variation in 60.9%, 58.3% and 57.9% of the players of the three respective clubs. Similarly, these results showed the intake of an insufficient amount of food respectively in 60.9%, 55.6% and 44.7% of the players of the three respective clubs. In the end, it was revealed an under-information in terms of sports nutrition in 100%, 77.78%, and 68.42% of the players of the three respective clubs. In conclusion, the food profile of footballers was inadequate and not controlled by nutritionists. This profile is associated with a nutritional imbalance, which is a factor in poor 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".