Throughout the sport-science and sports-medicine literature, the term “elite” subjects might be one of the most overused and ill-defined terms. Currently, there is no common perspective or terminology to characterize the caliber and training status of an individual or cohort. This paper presents a 6-tiered Participant Classification Framework whereby all individuals across a spectrum of exercise backgrounds and athletic abilities can be classified. The Participant Classification Framework uses training volume and performance metrics to classify a participant to one of the following: Tier 0: Sedentary; Tier 1: Recreationally Active; Tier 2: Trained/Developmental; Tier 3: Highly Trained/National Level; Tier 4: Elite/International Level; or Tier 5: World Class. We suggest the Participant Classification Framework can be used to classify participants both prospectively (as part of study participant recruitment) and retrospectively (during systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses). Discussion around how the Participant Classification Framework can be tailored toward different sports, athletes, and/or events has occurred, and sport-specific examples provided. Additional nuances such as depth of sport participation, nationality differences, and gender parity within a sport are all discussed. Finally, chronological age with reference to the junior and masters athlete, as well as the Paralympic athlete, and their inclusion within the Participant Classification Framework has also been considered. It is our intention that this framework be widely implemented to systematically classify participants in research featuring exercise, sport, performance, health, and/or fitness outcomes going forward, providing the much-needed uniformity to classification practices.

Although sports nutrition guidelines promote evidence-based practice, it is unclear whether women have been adequately included in the underpinning research. In view of the high usage rates of performance supplements by female athletes, we conducted a standardised audit of the literature supporting evidence-based products: β-alanine, caffeine, creatine, glycerol, nitrate/beetroot juice and sodium bicarbonate. Within 1826 studies totalling 34,889 participants, just 23% of participants were women, although 34% of studies included at least one woman. Across different supplements, 0–8% of studies investigated women exclusively, while fewer (0–2%) were specifically designed to compare sex-based responses. The annual publication of female-specific studies was ~8 times fewer than those investigating exclusively male cohorts. Interestingly, 15% of the female participants were classified as international/world-class athletes, compared with 7% of men. Most studies investigated performance outcomes but displayed poorer representation of women (16% of participants), whereas health-focussed studies had the greatest proportion of female participants (35%). Only 14% of studies including women attempted to define menstrual status, with only three studies (~0.5%) implementing best practice methodologies to assess menstrual status. New research should target the efficacy of performance supplements in female athletes, and future sports nutrition recommendations should specifically consider how well female athletes have contributed to the evidence-base.

The provision or restriction of select nutrients in an athlete’s diet can elicit a variety of changes in fuel utilization, training adaptation, and performance outcomes. Furthermore, nutrient availability can also influence athlete health, with one key system of interest being iron metabolism. The aim of this review was to synthesize the current evidence examining the impact of dietary manipulations on the iron regulatory response to exercise. Specifically, we assessed the impact of both acute and chronic carbohydrate (CHO) restriction on iron metabolism, with relevance to contemporary sports nutrition approaches, including models of periodized CHO availability and ketogenic low CHO high fat diets. Additionally, we reviewed the current evidence linking poor iron status and altered hepcidin activity with low energy availability in athletes. A cohesive understanding of these interactions guides nutritional recommendations for athletes struggling to maintain healthy iron stores, and highlights future directions and knowledge gaps specific to elite athletes.

Purpose: The aim of this audit was to assess the representation of female athletes within the literature that has led to current guidelines for carbohydrate (CHO) intake in the acute periods surrounding exercise and the quality of this research. Methods: We conducted a standardized audit of research assessing CHO loading protocols, CHO mouth rinse, and CHO intake before, during, and after exercise. Results: A total of 937 studies were identified in this audit. There were a total of 11,202 participants across these studies, with only ~11% being women. Most studies involved male-only cohorts (~79%), with a mere 38 studies (~4%) involving female-only cohorts and 14 studies (~2%) including a methodological design for comparison of sex-based responses. The frequent use of incorrect terminology surrounding menstrual status and the failure of most studies (~69%) to provide sufficient information on the menstrual status of participants suggests incomplete understanding and concern for female-specific considerations among researchers. Of the 197 studies that included women, only 13 (~7%) provided evidence of acceptable methodological control of ovarian hormones, and no study met all best-practice recommendations. Of these 13 studies, only half also provided sufficient information regarding the athletic caliber of participants. The topics that received such scrutiny were CHO loading protocols and CHO intake during exercise. Conclusions: The literature that underpins the current guidelines for CHO intake in the acute periods around exercise is lacking in high-quality research that can contribute knowledge specific to the female athlete and sex-based differences. New research that considers ovarian hormones and sex-based differences is needed to ensure that the recommendations for acute CHO fueling provided to female athletes are evidence based.

Field-based sport research involves studies that collect data from athletes and/or teams during competition and/or their daily training environments. Over the last decade, sport-specific field-based research projects have significantly increased in number and complexity, partially owing to the further development of more portable measurement equipment (e.g., indirect calorimetry, desktop blood/gas analyzers, portable laboratories, etc.) and/or wearable or consumable technologies (e.g., smart watches, sensors, core temp pills, etc.). However, given these rapid advances and novelty, challenges remain in the validity and applicability of these devices. Unfortunately, there are no global ethical or best-practice standards for the use of portable devices and/or wearables in sport; however, this review will outline various opportunities and challenges. Many decision trade-offs are required when designing field-based research studies to balance gold-standard scientific rigor and strict research control with highly applied, but less-controlled, “real-world” conditions. To our knowledge, there are no narrative reviews that take a wholistic view of the logistical and methodological considerations of field-based research in athletes. Accordingly, this review takes a multi-disciplinary methodological approach (physiological, nutritional/energetic, biomechanical, musculoskeletal, cognitive, and psychosocial factors), along with the logistical considerations involved in project planning, research design, and ethics of field-based research with elite athletes and/or teams. We also provide practical guidance for characterizing the extreme demands of elite training and competition to support research that ultimately catalyzes improved understanding of the limits of human capacity. We hope this review can serve as a practical guide for researchers undertaking elite athlete field-based research.

We implemented a multi-pronged strategy (MAX) involving chronic (2 weeks high carbohydrate [CHO] diet + gut-training) and acute (CHO loading + 90 g·h⁻¹ CHO during exercise) strategies to promote endogenous and exogenous CHO availability, compared with strategies reflecting lower ranges of current guidelines (CON) in two groups of athletes. Nineteen elite male race walkers (MAX: 9; CON:10) undertook a 26 km race-walking session before and after the respective interventions to investigate gastrointestinal function (absorption capacity), integrity (epithelial injury), and symptoms (GIS). We observed considerable individual variability in responses, resulting in a statistically significant (p < 0.001) yet likely clinically insignificant increase (Δ 736 pg·mL⁻¹) in I-FABP after exercise across all trials, with no significant differences in breath H₂ across exercise (p = 0.970). MAX was associated with increased GIS in the second half of the exercise, especially in upper GIS (p < 0.01). Eighteen highly trained male and female distance runners (MAX: 10; CON: 8) then completed a 35 km run (28 km steady-state + 7 km time-trial) supported by either a slightly modified MAX or CON strategy. Inter-individual variability was observed, without major differences in epithelial cell intestinal fatty acid binding protein (I-FABP) or GIS, due to exercise, trial, or group, despite the 3-fold increase in exercise CHO intake in MAX post-intervention. The tight-junction (claudin-3) response decreased in both groups from pre- to post-intervention. Groups achieved a similar performance improvement from pre- to post-intervention (CON = 39 s [95 CI 15–63 s]; MAX = 36 s [13–59 s]; p = 0.002). Although this suggests that further increases in CHO availability above current guidelines do not confer additional advantages, limitations in our study execution (e.g., confounding loss of BM in several individuals despite a live-in training camp environment and significant increases in aerobic capacity due to intensified training) may have masked small differences. Therefore, athletes should meet the minimum CHO guidelines for training and competition goals, noting that, with practice, increased CHO intake can be tolerated, and may contribute to performance outcomes.