Micronutrient Summary Table
Nutrition & Sports Nutrition Reference Tables
Micronutrient Summary Table
Athlete micronutrient review starts with an appropriate population reference and adds sport-specific risk assessment.
| Risk context | Priority review | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Low energy availability | Overall micronutrient and energy intake | Restore adequate fueling |
| Menstruation or endurance training | Iron status and intake | Assess before treatment |
| Restricted animal foods | B12, iron, zinc, calcium, iodine and others | Plan reliable sources |
| Limited sun exposure or bone risk | Vitamin D and calcium | Clinical testing when indicated |
Micronutrient Intake Assessment An evaluation of vitamin and mineral intake with attention to food sources, fortification, supplements and the relevant reference values.
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.
Usual intake describes a longer-term average rather than the intake of one isolated day. Day-to-day variation includes real differences between training, rest and competition days as well as measurement noise. Repeated observations should cover relevant conditions and be collected with a suitable method. Averaging a few unusual days can still give a misleading estimate. For the athlete, preserve useful information about distribution and timing: an acceptable weekly energy average can coexist with repeated underfueling around demanding sessions.
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.
🔒 The rest of this entry is available after free Google sign-in.
Home
Academy
Site Map