Channels • 2021 • Volume 5 • Number 2 Page 3 further developed the NSKQ in 2018 into a shorter, more palatable version called the abridged NSKQ (ANSKQ) (Trakman, et. al. 2018). The research group sought to validate a shorter version of the NSKQ to determine if the response rate would be higher if the questionnaire were shortened (Trakman, et. al. 2018). Karpinski, Dolins, and Bachman developed another questionnaire focused on sports nutrition in 2019. They titled this questionnaire, the 49-Item Sports Nutrition Knowledge Instrument, or the 49-SNKI. While similar to other recent questionnaires in the fact that it focused on sports nutrition knowledge, the 49-SNKI is different in that it focused specifically on an adult population (Karpinski, et. al.). The 49-SNKI questionnaire asked questions about six categories of nutrition knowledge that would be particularly impactful for athletes: carbohydrate, protein, fat, hydration, micronutrients, and weight management (Karpinski, et. al.). Researchers commonly either modify or design their own nutrition questionnaires for their research studies (Dickson-Spillman, et. al., Rosenbloom, et. al., Rash et. al. etc.). Oftentimes, these modifications or designs were a way of addressing the research topic and answering the research problem in the best manner. Our research team plans to add questions to the 49-SNKI to increase the quality of data we receive regarding sample characteristics and other important subjects. As these questions are not changing the content or the presentation of the 49-SNKI, we feel there is no need for concern about these modifications skewing the results of the questionnaire. While nutrition knowledge questionnaires are very common in the field of nutrition research, food frequency questionnaires (FFQ), food logs/diet records, and other similar tools are also consistently utilized. We chose to not incorporate FFQs, food logs, and diet records into our research study. We made this decision based on the type of content FFQs and food logs and diet records normally cover. In the current body of literature, studies using these measures normally seek to understand something about the practice of nutrition by their sample population. Common practice-type studies focus on the sample’s tendency to meet nutritional guidelines during the study (Abbey, et. al., Wall, et. al., Ha and Caine-Bish, etc.). These research tools are by no means less effective or valid than nutrition knowledge questionnaires. However, they are not appropriate for our study since they focus on the application or practice of nutrition, instead of the knowledge of nutrition. Consistent Themes Found in Literature A consistent theme throughout much of the literature was that athletes did not have a solid foundation of nutrition knowledge. A key article by Heaney S, et al, a systematic review of nutrition literature, evaluated 29 different studies, and found several important implications arising from them (Heaney, et. al.). The strongest conclusion found consistently throughout the literature was a general lack of nutrition knowledge in athletes as well as others. It is important to note that the articles in this review also showed strong correlations between a lack of nutrition knowledge/education and nutrition deficiencies.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=