Low Energy Availability Risk Is Associated with Anxiety in Female Collegiate Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the association between the risk of low energy availability, disordered eating, and anxiety in collegiate female athletes. Female athletes (n = 115) completed questionnaires that assessed disordered eating (Disordered Eating Screen for Athletes, DESA-6; and the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire Short, EDE-QS), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7) and the risk of low energy availability (Low Energy Availability in Females Questionnaire; LEAF-Q). The athletes were 19.9 ± 0.1 years old and presented with no anxiety (14.8%), mild (33.0%), moderate (24.3%), and severe (27.8%) anxiety. The EDE-QS scores revealed that 22.6% of the participants had a high risk of an eating disorder, while the DESA-6 scores revealed that 31.3% of the participants scored positive for a risk of disordered eating. The LEAF-Q total scores revealed that 68.7% of the participants were at risk of low energy availability. Increased GAD-7 scores were associated (p < 0.001) with measures of disordered eating (EDE-QS and DESA-6) and the risk of low energy availability (LEAF-Q total score). Non-parametric partial correlations demonstrated that anxiety (increased GAD-7 scores) correlated with the risk of low energy availability (increased LEAF-Q total scores) while controlling for eating disorder scores (EDE-QS) (r (112) = 0.353, p < 0.001), or while controlling for the risk of disordered eating (DESA-6 scores) (r (112) = 0.349, p < 0.001). In female collegiate athletes, both disordered eating and the risk of low energy availability were positively associated with increased anxiety.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".