GLOSSARY

Nutrition Assessment Cycle The repeating process of assessment, action and reassessment as nutritional needs and outcomes evolve.

For example, define what will be repeated, when and under which conditions before starting an intervention. A follow-up result can only be compared sensibly when the method and context are understood. Review symptoms, food intake and function as well as the selected number.

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.

Nutrition follow-up compares intended goals with actual intake, symptoms, function, relevant measurements and the person's experience. Specify the time frame and what would justify adjustment, continuation or referral. A treatment response can be beneficial, absent or adverse, and adherence alone does not prove effectiveness. Retain enough documentation to understand what changed. For an athlete, consider health and training quality alongside body mass or laboratory results so that apparent progress in one measure does not hide deterioration elsewhere.

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.