ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2026
The Remote Food Photography Method Is Valid for Assessing Dietary Intake of Serie A Football Players.
Article in European journal of sport science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To ensure football players meet their nutritional demands, sport nutritionists need to accurately collect and analyse dietary intake. However, dietary assessment methods have limitations. The Remote Food Photography Method (RFPM) is a valid approach, but the validation in real-life settings requires further investigations. This study aims to evaluate validity, accuracy and agreement of analysing energy and macronutrient intake using the RFPM in Serie A football players. Twenty players collected food intake over six nonconsecutive post-training meals representative of three typical training days. Players independently served themselves food from the club's canteen; plates were then weighed and consequently photographed. Energy, carbohydrate (CHO), protein and fat intake were analysed. RFPM demonstrated a very large validity between weighed and estimated values for CHO (rrmcorr (repeated measure correlation) = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-0.92, p < 0.05), protein (rrmcorr = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.81-0.92, p < 0.05), fat (rrmcorr = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.81-0.92, p < 0.05) and energy intake (rrmcorr = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.78-0.90, p < 0.05). Good agreement was observed for CHO -0.83 [-24.41 to 22.75] g, protein 3.23 [-10.87 to 17.33] g, fat 0.85 [-6.96 to 8.66] g and energy 17.27 [-160.41 to 194.95] kcal. There was no systematic bias. Moderate accuracy and acceptable precision, consistent over different training days, were demonstrated for CHO, protein and energy intake. Intra-operator reliability, performed by repeating 30% of the estimations by the same operator, was good for CHO (CV = 4.7%), protein (CV = 3.6%) and energy (CV = 3.8%) and acceptable for fat intake (CV = 7.8%). The study confirms the RFPM is accurate and reliable for assessing energy and macronutrient intake of elite football players in a real-training environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.