GLOSSARY

Dietary Symptom Assessment An evaluation of symptoms that influence eating or appear related to intake, without assuming that temporal association proves causation.

Screening tools identify people who may need further nutrition assessment. Choose a validated tool for its intended population and setting, and follow its actual instructions rather than inventing a hybrid score. MUST, MNA and NRS-2002 have different purposes; SGA and PG-SGA involve broader assessment information. A positive result should lead to a suitable next step. A negative result does not override concerning symptoms, deteriorating function or a clinical history outside the tool's scope, especially when sport-specific underfueling is suspected.

Nutrition screening identifies people who may need fuller assessment; it does not establish every cause or prescribe treatment by itself. Use a suitable validated tool in the population for which it is intended, then follow a positive result with appropriate evaluation. Include recent intake, unintentional weight change, symptoms and clinical context. Repeat assessment when circumstances change. A negative screen is not a reason to ignore a new concerning symptom or a clear deterioration in the athlete's function.

Malnutrition can occur across body sizes, including in a person with obesity. Assessment considers reduced intake or assimilation, disease-related inflammation, weight trajectory and relevant body-composition or functional findings. Undernutrition, overnutrition and individual micronutrient deficiencies describe overlapping but distinct problems. A stable or high body weight cannot exclude inadequate nutrient supply or muscle loss. In an athlete, declining intake, recurrent illness or unintentional weight loss deserves assessment rather than automatic praise for becoming lighter.

Choose a dietary assessment method according to the question, population and resources. A recent intake record can explore meal timing around training; a frequency questionnaire can describe longer-term patterns. Neither automatically establishes exact habitual intake. Combine food details with training, access, symptoms, medication and relevant measurements. Explain uncertainties and what the method cannot answer. Good assessment produces a decision that can be reviewed, rather than an impressive nutrient report whose apparent precision exceeds the quality of the information collected.

Nutrient status reflects intake, absorption, distribution, stores, losses and physiological demand. A normal blood concentration may not exclude depleted stores, while an abnormal result can have non-nutritional causes. Calcium in blood, for example, does not directly measure dietary calcium adequacy or skeletal reserves. Different nutrients require different assessment strategies. Select tests for a defined clinical question and interpret them with symptoms, diet, relevant disease and sampling conditions instead of ordering a broad panel and assuming every number is a performance target.

A nutrition care record should explain the assessment, interpretation, agreed plan, responsible professionals and follow-up criteria. Separate reported information from measured findings and clinical judgments. Record relevant units, dates, methods and changes so that another practitioner can understand the decision. Seek consent for sharing sensitive information and limit access appropriately. A referral should communicate the specific concern and urgency rather than only a broad label. In sport, documentation should support continuity of care while protecting health information from inappropriate use in coaching or selection.