Methodology Review: A Protocol to Audit the Representation of Female Athletes in Sports Science and Sports Medicine Research

Abstract

Female-specific research on sports science and sports medicine (SSSM) fails to mirror the increase in participation and popularity of women’s sport. Females have historically been excluded from SSSM research, particularly because their physiological intricacy necessitates more complex study designs, longer research times, and additional costs. Consequently, most SSSM practices are based on research with men, despite potential problems in translation to females due to sexual dimorphism in biological and phenotypical parameters as well as differences in event characteristics (e.g., race distances/durations). Recognition that erroneous extrapolations may hamper the efforts of females to maximize their athletic potential has created an impetus to acknowledge and readdress the sex disparity in SSSM research. To direct the priorities for future research, it is prudent to first develop a comprehensive understanding of the gaps in current knowledge by systematically “auditing” the literature. By conducting audits of the literature to highlight underdeveloped topics or identify potential problems with the quality of research, this information can then be used to expediently direct new research activities. This paper therefore presents a standardized audit methodology to establish the representation of female athletes in subdisciplines of existing SSSM research, including a template for reporting the results of key metrics. This standardized audit process will enable comparisons over time and between research subdisciplines. This working guide provides an important step toward achieving sex equity across SSSM research, with the eventual goal of providing evidence-based recommendations specific to the female athlete.

Auditing the Representation of Female Versus Male Athletes in Sports Science and Sports Medicine Research: Evidence-Based Performance Supplements

“…This audit was conducted according to methods comprehensively outlined by Smith et al [ 1 ]. Information specific to the current audit is detailed below.…”

“…Female-targeted research related to sports science/sports medicine (SSSM) has failed to mirror the increase in participation and popularity of women’s sport [ 1 ]. While many aspects of women’s sport gain parity with their male counterparts, audits show a substantial under-representation of women as study participants, with female-only projects accounting for just 4–13% of all studies [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ].…”

“…While many aspects of women’s sport gain parity with their male counterparts, audits show a substantial under-representation of women as study participants, with female-only projects accounting for just 4–13% of all studies [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]. Of the multiple explanations [ 1 ], the complexity of female physiology represents a long-standing challenge, with the additional intricacy, time and expense involved in study designs being a deterrent to many researchers. The practical result of female under-representation in SSSM research is that most guidelines for training and nutrition strategies to optimise performance are underpinned by research conducted in men, without consideration of issues associated with the application to female athletes.…”

“…Indeed, the gold standard of evidence-based practice is hindered by concerns over the ecological validity and transferability of findings from studies of male athletes in the absence of robust research on female-specific considerations. A tactical approach to redressing this situation includes auditing the current literature [ 1 ] to identify themes that could be considered high priority. These include issues for which there is minimal information on female-specific response to an intervention; a potential difference/unique sex-related consideration; a popular interest or usage in the strategy; and/or the likelihood of a substantial magnitude of change associated with optimal practice.…”

“…However, it is unclear whether female athletes have been specifically considered in the development of the current best-practice supplementation protocols. Therefore, our aim was to review the current literature, utilising our recently developed audit protocol [ 1 ], to examine the representation of women in studies that support recognised performance supplements. We chose the six performance supplements included in Category A of the Australian Institute of Sport Sports Supplement Framework [ 18 ] (β-alanine, caffeine, creatine, glycerol, nitrate/beetroot juice and sodium bicarbonate), described as “supplements with strong scientific evidence for use in specific situations in sport using evidence-based protocols” [ 15 ].…”