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.

KEYWORDS:

• Female Athlete Triad
• Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S)
• risk assessment
• eligibility decisions

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Pennsylvania State University [Childhood Obesity Prevention Training Program];U.S. Department of Defense [PR054531].