Context: Nutrition education aims to enhance knowledge and improve dietary intake in athletes. Understanding athletes' nutrition knowledge and its influence on dietary intake will inform nutrition-education programs in this population. Purpose: To systematically review the level of nutrition knowledge in athletes, benchmark this against nonathlete comparison groups, and determine the impact of nutrition knowledge on dietary intake. Methods: An extensive literature search from the earliest record to March 2010 using the terms nutrition knowledge or diet knowledge and athlete or sport was conducted. Included studies recruited able or physically disabled, male or female, competitive (recreational or elite) athletes over the age of 13 yr. Quantitative assessment of knowledge and, if available, diet intake was required. Because of variability in the assessment of nutrition knowledge and dietary intake, meta-analysis was not conducted. Results: Twenty-nine studies (17 published before 2000) measuring nutrition knowledge (7 including a nonathlete comparison group) met inclusion criteria. Athletes' knowledge was equal to or better than that of nonathletes but lower than comparison groups including nutrition students. When found statistically significant, knowledge was greater in females than males. A weak (r < .44), positive association between knowledge and dietary intake was reported in 5 of 9 studies assessing this. Common flaws in articles included inadequate statistical reporting, instrument validation, and benchmarking. Conclusion: The nutrition knowledge of athletes and its impact on their dietary intake is equivocal. There is a need for high-quality, contemporary research using validated tools to measure nutrition knowledge and its impact on dietary intake.

mean (Standard Deviation). A total of 101 athletes (Males: 37; Females: 64), 18.6 (4.6) years were recruited mainly from team sports (72.0%). Females scored higher than males for both nutrition knowledge (Females: 59.9%; Males: 55.6%; p = .017) and total A-ARFS (Females: 54.2% Males: 49.4%; p = .016). There was no significant influence of age, level of education, athletic caliber or team/individual sport participation on nutrition knowledge or total A-ARFS. However, athletes engaged in previous dietetic consultation had significantly higher nutrition knowledge (61.6% vs. 56.6%; p = .034) but not total A-ARFS (53.6% vs. 52.0%; p = .466). Nutrition knowledge was weakly but positively associated with total A-ARFS (r = .261, p= .008) and A-ARFS vegetable subgroup (r = .252, p = .024) independently explaining 6.8% and 5.1% of the variance respectively. Gender independently explained 5.6% of the variance in nutrition knowledge (p= .017) and 6.7% in total A-ARFS (p = .016). Higher nutrition knowledge and female gender were weakly but positively associated with better diet quality. Given the importance of nutrition to health and optimal sports performance, intervention to improve nutrition knowledge and healthy eating is recommended, especially for young male athletes.

The objective of this study was to describe barriers influencing dietary practices of elite-level athletes using a focus-group design involving discussions with elite-level athletes, coaches and sports dietitians. The participants were sixteen male and thirty female elite athletes from an Australian State Institute of Sport, representing diving, netball, basketball and lawn bowls; twelve elite coaches representing swimming, diving, soccer, sailing, cycling and golf; and sixteen sports dietitians who consulted to state institutes/academies of sport with various sports. Focus groups were audio-taped and transcribed with in-depth notes also recorded during the groups. Thematic coding of transcripts and notes were undertaken by the primary coder and these themes were subsequently evaluated by the research team. A number of barriers to healthy eating were described. Lack of time for food preparation was a significant barrier raised by all groups. Financial limitations, inadequate cooking skills and difficulty with living arrangements also rated high among all three groups. Coaches were concerned with excess body weight and fat levels and perceived an impact on sports performance. Athletes reported concern about body shape due to societal pressures. Sports dietitians and coaches were concerned with issues relating to optimal dietary provision surrounding travel to and from training and competition. A range of barriers influence the diet of athletes, in particular time and financial constraints in addition to specific physique requirements. Health professionals working with elite athletes need to be aware of these barriers when assessing dietary intake, or designing nutrition interventions. Dietitians may need to advocate on behalf of athletes to facilitate increased financial or professional support to assist athletes to choose and then maintain healthy diet practices.

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.

Interpretation of dietary adequacy is complex and varies depending on whether the mean, proportion of participants below the relevant NRV, or statistical probability estimate of inadequacy is used. Further research on methods to determine dietary adequacy in athlete populations is required.