Abstract：
Female soccer players have been identified as presenting with low energy availability (LEA), though the prevalence of LEA may be overestimated given inaccuracies associated with self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, we aimed to quantify total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) via the doubly labelled water (DLW) method, energy intake (EI) and energy availability (EA). Adolescent female soccer players (n = 45; 16 ± 1 years) completed a 9-10 day \'training camp\' representing their national team. Absolute and relative TDEE was 2683 ± 324 and 60 ± 7 kcal kg-1 fat free mass (FFM), respectively. Mean daily EI was lower (P < 0.01) when players self-reported using the remote food photography method (RFPM) (2047 ± 383 kcal day-1) over a 3-day period versus DLW derived EI estimates accounting for body mass (BM) changes (2545 ± 518 kcal day-1) over 7-8 days, representing a mean daily Δ of 499 ± 526 kcal day-1 and 22% error when using the RFPM. Estimated EA was different (P < 0.01) between methods (DLW: 48 ± 14 kcal kg-1 FFM, range: 22-82; RFPM: 37 ± 8 kcal kg-1 FFM, range: 22-54), such that prevalence of LEA (<30 kcal kg-1 FFM) was lower in DLW compared with RFPM (5% vs. 15%, respectively). Data demonstrate the potential to significantly underestimate EI when using self-report methods. This approach can therefore cause a misrepresentation and an over-prevalence of LEA, which is the underlying aetiology of \'relative energy deficiency in sport\' (REDs). HIGHLIGHTS: What is the central question of this study? Do self-reported dietary intakes (via remote food photography method, RFPM) overestimate low energy availability (LEA) prevalence in female soccer players compared with energy intake evaluation from the doubly labelled water (DLW) method? What is the main finding and its importance? Estimated energy availability is greater with the DLW method compared with RFPM, such that the prevalence of LEA is greater when self-reporting dietary intakes. Accordingly, data demonstrate the potential to misrepresent the prevalence of LEA, an underlying factor in the aetiology of \'relative energy deficiency in sport\' (REDs).
摘要：
女足球运动员已被确定为低能量可用性（LEA），尽管考虑到与自我报告饮食摄入量相关的不准确性，LEA的患病率可能被高估了。因此，我们的目标是通过双标记水(DLW)方法量化每日总能量消耗(TDEE)，能量摄入(EI)和能量可用性(EA)。青少年女足球运动员（n=45；16±1岁）代表国家队完成了9-10天的“训练营”。绝对和相对TDEE为2683±324和60±7kcalkg-1无脂肪质量（FFM），分别。当玩家在3天的时间内使用远程食物摄影方法（RFPM）（2047±383kcalday-1）进行自我报告时，平均每日EI较低（P<0.01），而DLW得出的EI估计值则占7-8天的体重（BM）变化（2545±518kcalday-1），表示使用RFPM时，每日平均Δ为499±526千卡第1天，误差为22%。方法之间的估计EA不同（P<0.01）（DLW：48±14kcalkg-1FFM，范围：22-82；RFPM：37±8kcalkg-1FFM，范围：22-54），与RFPM相比，DLW中LEA(<30kcalkg-1FFM)的患病率较低(5%vs.15%,分别)。数据表明，使用自我报告方法时，有可能大大低估EI。因此，这种方法可能导致LEA的虚假陈述和过度流行，这是“运动中相对能量缺乏”(REDs)的潜在病因。重点：这项研究的中心问题是什么？自我报告的饮食摄入量（通过远程食物摄影方法，RFPM）与双标记水（DLW）方法的能量摄入评估相比，高估了女足球运动员的低能量可用性（LEA）患病率？主要发现及其重要性是什么？与RFPM相比，DLW方法的估计能量可用性更高，这样，当自我报告饮食摄入量时，LEA的患病率更高。因此，数据表明有可能歪曲LEA的患病率，“运动中相对能量缺乏”(REDs)病因的潜在因素。
