This review demonstrates that literature describing the dietary intake practices of competitive bodybuilders is dated and often of poor quality. Intake reporting required better specificity and details of the rationale underpinning the use. The review suggests that high-quality contemporary research is needed in this area, with the potential to uncover dietary strategies worthy of scientific exploration.
The aim of the present study was to investigate and benchmark the level of general nutrition knowledge in elite Australian athletes (EA) against a similar aged community (CM) and criterion sample with dietetic training (DT). EA (n 175), CM (n 116) and DT (n 53) completed the General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire (GNKQ), which assesses four domains (sections A -D) of general nutrition knowledge (section A: dietary guidelines; section B: sources of nutrients; section C: choosing everyday foods; section D: diet -disease relationships). Age, sex and education level were collected in all groups, and athletic calibre and sport type (team or individual) in EA. Dietitians and nutrition scientists (n 53) re-examined the GNKQ for content validity, resulting in instrument revision (R-GNKQ; ninety-six items). Psychometric assessment (internal consistency: Cronbach-a; test-retest: Spearman rank correlation) was performed in a sub-sample (n 28). Independent t tests, ANOVA and ANCOVA (x 2 for categorical variables) were used to assess between-group differences. DT scored higher than EA and CM in all sub-sections and overall (P,0·005). EA scored lower than CM in GNKQ for section B (P, 0·005) and overall (P,0·005), and in R-GNKQ for section B (P, 0·005), section C (P,0·005), section D (P¼0·006) and overall (P,0·005). Overall score was influenced by age (P¼ 0·036 for GNKQ: P¼0·053 for R-GNKQ), sex (P¼ 0·016 for GNKQ: P¼ 0·003 for R-GNKQ) and athletic calibre (P¼0·029 for R-GNKQ only), but not level of education, living situation or ethnicity. EA and CM performed best on section A and worst on D. EA had lower overall general knowledge scores than CM. This was significantly influenced by age and sex.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.