Comparison of Female Athlete Triad Coalition and RED-S risk assessment tools

Kristen J. Koltun, Nicole C.A. Strock, Emily A. Southmayd, Andrew P. Oneglia, Nancy Williams, Mary Jane De Souza

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The Female Athlete Triad Coalition (Triad Coalition) and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S) consensus statements each include risk assessment tools to guide athlete eligibility decisions. This study examined how these tools categorized the same set of individuals to an overall risk factor score and qualitatively compared athlete eligibility decisions resulting from each tool. Exercising women (n = 166) with complete screening/baseline datasets from multiple previously conducted studies were assessed. Data used for risk assessment included: anthropometric measurements, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans, exercise and health status surveys, and two disordered eating questionnaires (Three Factor Eating Questionnaire and Eating Disorder Inventory). Individuals were scored on each tool and subsequently categorized as either fully cleared, provisionally cleared, or restricted from play. Based on the Triad Coalition tool, 25.3% of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 62.0% as provisionally cleared, and 12.7% as restricted from play. Based on the RED-S tool, 71.7% of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 18.7% as provisionally cleared, and 9.6% as restricted from play. The Triad Coalition and RED-S tools resulted in different clearance decisions (p < 0.001), with the Triad Coalition tool recommending increased surveillance of a greater number of athletes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Sports Sciences
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Female Athlete Triad Syndrome
Athletes
Sports
Eating
Health Surveys
Health Status
Consensus
X-Rays
Exercise
Equipment and Supplies
Surveys and Questionnaires

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Koltun, Kristen J. ; Strock, Nicole C.A. ; Southmayd, Emily A. ; Oneglia, Andrew P. ; Williams, Nancy ; De Souza, Mary Jane. / Comparison of Female Athlete Triad Coalition and RED-S risk assessment tools. In: Journal of Sports Sciences. 2019.
@article{537d1db9a52d43829cb23681145e544f,
title = "Comparison of Female Athlete Triad Coalition and RED-S risk assessment tools",
abstract = "The Female Athlete Triad Coalition (Triad Coalition) and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S) consensus statements each include risk assessment tools to guide athlete eligibility decisions. This study examined how these tools categorized the same set of individuals to an overall risk factor score and qualitatively compared athlete eligibility decisions resulting from each tool. Exercising women (n = 166) with complete screening/baseline datasets from multiple previously conducted studies were assessed. Data used for risk assessment included: anthropometric measurements, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans, exercise and health status surveys, and two disordered eating questionnaires (Three Factor Eating Questionnaire and Eating Disorder Inventory). Individuals were scored on each tool and subsequently categorized as either fully cleared, provisionally cleared, or restricted from play. Based on the Triad Coalition tool, 25.3{\%} of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 62.0{\%} as provisionally cleared, and 12.7{\%} as restricted from play. Based on the RED-S tool, 71.7{\%} of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 18.7{\%} as provisionally cleared, and 9.6{\%} as restricted from play. The Triad Coalition and RED-S tools resulted in different clearance decisions (p < 0.001), with the Triad Coalition tool recommending increased surveillance of a greater number of athletes.",
author = "Koltun, {Kristen J.} and Strock, {Nicole C.A.} and Southmayd, {Emily A.} and Oneglia, {Andrew P.} and Nancy Williams and {De Souza}, {Mary Jane}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/02640414.2019.1640551",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Sports Sciences",
issn = "0264-0414",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

Comparison of Female Athlete Triad Coalition and RED-S risk assessment tools. / Koltun, Kristen J.; Strock, Nicole C.A.; Southmayd, Emily A.; Oneglia, Andrew P.; Williams, Nancy; De Souza, Mary Jane.

In: Journal of Sports Sciences, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Female Athlete Triad Coalition and RED-S risk assessment tools

AU - Koltun, Kristen J.

AU - Strock, Nicole C.A.

AU - Southmayd, Emily A.

AU - Oneglia, Andrew P.

AU - Williams, Nancy

AU - De Souza, Mary Jane

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The Female Athlete Triad Coalition (Triad Coalition) and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S) consensus statements each include risk assessment tools to guide athlete eligibility decisions. This study examined how these tools categorized the same set of individuals to an overall risk factor score and qualitatively compared athlete eligibility decisions resulting from each tool. Exercising women (n = 166) with complete screening/baseline datasets from multiple previously conducted studies were assessed. Data used for risk assessment included: anthropometric measurements, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans, exercise and health status surveys, and two disordered eating questionnaires (Three Factor Eating Questionnaire and Eating Disorder Inventory). Individuals were scored on each tool and subsequently categorized as either fully cleared, provisionally cleared, or restricted from play. Based on the Triad Coalition tool, 25.3% of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 62.0% as provisionally cleared, and 12.7% as restricted from play. Based on the RED-S tool, 71.7% of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 18.7% as provisionally cleared, and 9.6% as restricted from play. The Triad Coalition and RED-S tools resulted in different clearance decisions (p < 0.001), with the Triad Coalition tool recommending increased surveillance of a greater number of athletes.

AB - The Female Athlete Triad Coalition (Triad Coalition) and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S) consensus statements each include risk assessment tools to guide athlete eligibility decisions. This study examined how these tools categorized the same set of individuals to an overall risk factor score and qualitatively compared athlete eligibility decisions resulting from each tool. Exercising women (n = 166) with complete screening/baseline datasets from multiple previously conducted studies were assessed. Data used for risk assessment included: anthropometric measurements, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans, exercise and health status surveys, and two disordered eating questionnaires (Three Factor Eating Questionnaire and Eating Disorder Inventory). Individuals were scored on each tool and subsequently categorized as either fully cleared, provisionally cleared, or restricted from play. Based on the Triad Coalition tool, 25.3% of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 62.0% as provisionally cleared, and 12.7% as restricted from play. Based on the RED-S tool, 71.7% of subjects were classified as fully cleared, 18.7% as provisionally cleared, and 9.6% as restricted from play. The Triad Coalition and RED-S tools resulted in different clearance decisions (p < 0.001), with the Triad Coalition tool recommending increased surveillance of a greater number of athletes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068785527&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068785527&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/02640414.2019.1640551

DO - 10.1080/02640414.2019.1640551

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Sports Sciences

JF - Journal of Sports Sciences

SN - 0264-0414

ER -