Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 119

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nutritional supplement practices in UK junior national track and field athletes

Nieper, A·2005·British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Methods:The nutritional supplementation practices of 32 national track and field athletes competing at the 2004 World Junior Championships were studied using an anonymous questionnaire. Information was sought on the prevalence and type of supplement used, the reasons for use, knowledge of supplements, and sources of information. Results:Use of supplements was widespread with 62% of respondents declaring supplement use. Prevalence in female athletes (75%) was higher than in males (55%) but was not statistically significant. No differences were found for age, training volume, or type of event. Seventeen different supplements were taken, with each athlete using an average of 2.4 products, multivitamins and minerals being the most popular. Reasons for using supplements were for health (45%), to enhance the immune system (40%), and to improve performance (25%). Of all respondents 48% believed they had an average knowledge of supplements, but three quarters felt that they required further information. Those not using supplements were more likely to think supplements were associated with health risks than those taking them (p = 0.03). Most athletes (72%) have access to a sports dietician but underutilise this resource. Coaches (65%) had the greatest influence on supplementation practices, with doctors (25%) and sports dieticians (30%) being less important. Conclusions:Supplementation practices were widespread among the population studied. The findings of this investigation could be used to enable the sports dietician and physician to identify common misconceptions held by adolescent athletes regarding nutritional supplements and to implement educational programs, which should include members of the non-medical support team.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bjsm.2004.015842

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. 1992, Med Sci Sports Exerc, 24, 726
  2. 10.2165/00007256-200333120-00004 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 2001, J Nutr, 131, 1114, 10.1093/jn/131.3.1114S · DOI
  4. 2003, Food supplement regulations published, 4, 1
  5. 2000, Dtsch Z Sportmed, 51, 378
  6. 2003, Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab, 13, 112, 10.1123/ijsnem.13.1.112 · DOI
  7. 10.1097/00042752-200305000-00010 · DOI
  8. 2003, Lancet, 11, 101
  9. 10.1034/j.1600-0838.2003.10288.x · DOI · Paper page
  10. 1994, Int J Sport Nutr, 4, 320, 10.1123/ijsn.4.4.320 · DOI
  11. 2003, Int J Sport Nutr, 13, 320
  12. 2001, Health Med Week, June 11, 8
  13. 1995, Int J Sport Nutr, 5, 232, 10.1123/ijsn.5.3.232 · DOI
  14. 2002, Dtsch Z Sportmed, 38, 51
  15. 2001, Int J Sport Nutr, 11, 174

Cited by

See all 119

Metadata

Authors
Nieper, A.
Venue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2005-08-23
Volume
39
Issue
9
Pages
645-649
ISSN
  • 0306-3674
  • 1473-0480
Cited by
119
References
5
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.