GLOSSARY

mg–µg–g Conversion Table

Mass prefixes are exact powers of ten; keep the unit attached to the number to prevent thousand-fold errors.

Food Composition Table A tabulated presentation of nutrient composition for specified food quantities and forms.

Food composition analysis depends on matching the reported food to an appropriate database entry. Variety, brand, fortification, preparation and raw-versus-cooked weight can change the match. Missing data do not necessarily mean that a nutrient is absent. Recipes require ingredient amounts, edible yields and suitable retention assumptions. Record the database and version when comparability matters. A detailed software output remains an estimate; checking the food match and units can be more valuable than reporting many decimal places from uncertain intake data.

Portion assessment translates what a person reports into a usable quantity. Household measures, photographs, food models and scales offer different types of help; none eliminates uncertainty. Distinguish an individual's actual portion from a standardized serving used for analysis or labeling. Check density, container size, edible fraction and whether a photograph depicts the same food form. In an athlete's plan, practical examples should make adequate intake easier while allowing the assessor to explain how the reported amount was estimated and where uncertainty remains.

Accuracy concerns closeness to an appropriate reference, while precision concerns repeatability; consistent measurements can still be systematically wrong. Validity asks whether a method supports its intended interpretation, and reliability asks how consistently it performs. Reporting error can reflect memory, burden, food omission or social pressure. An implausible estimate should prompt review rather than an accusation. Calibration may reduce specific errors under defined assumptions, but it does not turn every self-report into an exact measurement of an athlete's habitual intake.